Hope Tempered by Caution: Public Beliefs in the USA about the Benefits and Drawbacks of Using Epigenetic Technologies in Clinical Care.

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q4 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Public Health Genomics Pub Date : 2026-01-01 Epub Date: 2026-08-05 DOI:10.1159/phg/aenag003
Erika A Waters, Caitlin Yuen, Clarissa Gaona Romero, Julia Maki, Bryce Puesta Takenaka, Aantaki Raisa, Erin Linnenbringer, Jada G Hamilton, Jessica Mozersky, George P Souroullas, Chelsey R Carter
{"title":"Hope Tempered by Caution: Public Beliefs in the USA about the Benefits and Drawbacks of Using Epigenetic Technologies in Clinical Care.","authors":"Erika A Waters, Caitlin Yuen, Clarissa Gaona Romero, Julia Maki, Bryce Puesta Takenaka, Aantaki Raisa, Erin Linnenbringer, Jada G Hamilton, Jessica Mozersky, George P Souroullas, Chelsey R Carter","doi":"10.1159/phg/aenag003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Clinical applications of epigenetic technologies could revolutionize precision medicine. However, successful uptake in clinical settings may be influenced by public opinion. We investigated public beliefs about possible benefits and drawbacks of epigenetic-based medical technologies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We recruited 153 adults from across the USA to participate in 1 of 27 virtual focus groups, each lasting 45-75 min. Groups were stratified by education (less than bachelor's degree vs. bachelor's degree or more) and race and ethnicity (black or African American, Asian, Indigenous [Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, American Indian, Alaska Native], Hispanic, and white). Participants viewed an educational video about epigenetics prior to discussion. We used inductive and deductive qualitative content analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants indicated that epigenetic technologies could be used to guide risk-stratified prevention (i.e., engage in behaviors to reduce the risk of developing a health condition; engage in screening and early-detection behaviors to enable early treatment; facilitate clinical history-taking; inform reproductive planning decisions) and to develop novel therapeutics and editing approaches (i.e., new medications; epigenetic editing). However, participants also mentioned concerns about the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSIs) of epigenetics, including exacerbating health disparities; the high cost of treatment and health insurance; promoting eugenics; and epigenetic-based discrimination by healthcare providers. Each of the race, education, and ethnicity strata included content related to each of the three major subthemes of risk-stratified prevention, novel therapeutics, and ELSI considerations.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Efforts to translate basic epigenetics research to clinical practice hold promise, but it is also critical to create solutions that address people's concerns.</p>","PeriodicalId":49650,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Genomics","volume":" ","pages":"278-288"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13688360/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Genomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/phg/aenag003","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/8/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Clinical applications of epigenetic technologies could revolutionize precision medicine. However, successful uptake in clinical settings may be influenced by public opinion. We investigated public beliefs about possible benefits and drawbacks of epigenetic-based medical technologies.

Methods: We recruited 153 adults from across the USA to participate in 1 of 27 virtual focus groups, each lasting 45-75 min. Groups were stratified by education (less than bachelor's degree vs. bachelor's degree or more) and race and ethnicity (black or African American, Asian, Indigenous [Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, American Indian, Alaska Native], Hispanic, and white). Participants viewed an educational video about epigenetics prior to discussion. We used inductive and deductive qualitative content analysis.

Results: Participants indicated that epigenetic technologies could be used to guide risk-stratified prevention (i.e., engage in behaviors to reduce the risk of developing a health condition; engage in screening and early-detection behaviors to enable early treatment; facilitate clinical history-taking; inform reproductive planning decisions) and to develop novel therapeutics and editing approaches (i.e., new medications; epigenetic editing). However, participants also mentioned concerns about the ethical, legal, and social implications (ELSIs) of epigenetics, including exacerbating health disparities; the high cost of treatment and health insurance; promoting eugenics; and epigenetic-based discrimination by healthcare providers. Each of the race, education, and ethnicity strata included content related to each of the three major subthemes of risk-stratified prevention, novel therapeutics, and ELSI considerations.

Conclusion: Efforts to translate basic epigenetics research to clinical practice hold promise, but it is also critical to create solutions that address people's concerns.

希望被谨慎所调和:美国公众对在临床护理中使用表观遗传技术的利弊的看法。
目的:表观遗传技术的临床应用将给精准医学带来革命性的变化。然而,在临床环境中成功的吸收可能会受到公众舆论的影响。我们调查了公众对基于表观遗传学的医疗技术可能的好处和缺点的看法。方法:我们从美国各地招募了153名成年人参加27个虚拟焦点小组之一,每个小组持续45-75分钟。各组按教育程度(少于学士学位vs多于学士学位)、种族和民族(黑人/非裔美国人、亚洲人、土著[夏威夷土著/太平洋岛民、美洲印第安人/阿拉斯加土著]、西班牙裔和白人)进行分层。在讨论之前,参与者观看了一段关于表观遗传学的教育视频。我们采用归纳和演绎定性含量分析。结果:与会者指出,表观遗传技术可用于指导风险分层预防(即,采取减少出现健康状况的风险的行为;开展筛查和早期发现行为,以实现早期治疗;促进临床记录;为生殖计划决策提供信息),并开发新的治疗方法和编辑方法(即,新药物;表观遗传编辑)。然而,与会者也提到了对表观遗传学的伦理、法律和社会影响(ELSI)的担忧,包括:加剧健康差距;治疗和医疗保险费用高昂;促进优生;以及医疗服务提供者基于表观遗传学的歧视。每个种族、教育和民族阶层都包括与风险分层预防、新疗法和ELSI考虑三个主要子主题相关的内容。讨论:努力将基础表观遗传学研究转化为临床实践是有希望的,但创造解决人们关注的问题的解决方案也至关重要。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Public Health Genomics
Public Health Genomics 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ''Public Health Genomics'' is the leading international journal focusing on the timely translation of genome-based knowledge and technologies into public health, health policies, and healthcare as a whole. This peer-reviewed journal is a bimonthly forum featuring original papers, reviews, short communications, and policy statements. It is supplemented by topic-specific issues providing a comprehensive, holistic and ''all-inclusive'' picture of the chosen subject. Multidisciplinary in scope, it combines theoretical and empirical work from a range of disciplines, notably public health, molecular and medical sciences, the humanities and social sciences. In so doing, it also takes into account rapid scientific advances from fields such as systems biology, microbiomics, epigenomics or information and communication technologies as well as the hight potential of ''big data'' for public health.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书