Counselees' Perspectives of Genomic Counseling Following Online Receipt of Multiple Actionable Complex Disease and Pharmacogenomic Results: a Qualitative Research Study.

Genomic applications raise multiple challenges including the optimization of genomic counseling (GC) services as part of the results delivery process. More information on patients' motivations, preferences, and informational needs are essential to guide the development of new, more efficient practice delivery models that capitalize on the existing strengths of a limited genetic counseling workforce. Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with a subset of counselees from the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative following online receipt of multiple personalized genomic test reports. Participants previously had either in-person GC (chronic disease cohort, n = 20; mean age 60 years) or telephone GC (community cohort, n = 31; mean age 46.8 years). Transcripts were analyzed using a Grounded Theory framework. Major themes that emerged from the interviews include 1) primary reasons for seeking GC were to clarify results, put results into perspective relative to other health-related concerns, and to receive personalized recommendations; 2) there is need for a more participant driven approach in terms of mode of GC communication (in-person, phone, video), and refining the counseling agenda pre-session; and 3) there was strong interest in the option of follow up GC. By clarifying counselees' expectations, views and desired outcomes, we have uncovered a need for a more participant-driven GC model when potentially actionable genomic results are received online.

A randomized trial Examining The Impact Of Communicating Genetic And Lifestyle Risks For Obesity.

OBJECTIVE: Genetic testing for obesity is available directly to consumers, yet little is understood about its behavioral impact and its added value to nongenetic risk communication efforts based on lifestyle factors. METHODS: A randomized trial examined the short-term impact of providing personalized obesity risk information, using a 2 × 2 factorial design. Participants were recruited from the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC) and randomized to receive (1) no risk information (control), (2) genetic risk, (3) lifestyle risk, or (4) combined genetic/lifestyle risks. Baseline and 3-month follow-up survey data were collected. Analyses examined the impact of risk feedback on intentions to lose weight and self-reported weight. RESULTS: A total of 696 participants completed the study. A significant interaction effect was observed for genetic and lifestyle information on intent to lose weight (P = 0.0150). Those who received genetic risk alone had greater intentions at follow-up, compared with controls (P = 0.0034). The impact of receiving elevated risk information on intentions varied by source and combination of risks presented. Non-elevated genetic risk did not lower intentions. No group differences were observed for self-reported weight. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic risk information for obesity may add value to lifestyle risk information depending on the context in which it is presented.

An expanded pharmacogenomics warfarin dosing table with utility in generalised dosing guidance.

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) guided warfarin dosing, using a comprehensive dosing algorithm, is expected to improve dose optimisation and lower the risk of adverse drug reactions. As a complementary tool, a simple genotype-dosing table, such as in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Coumadin drug label, may be utilised for general risk assessment of likely over- or under-anticoagulation on a standard dose of warfarin. This tool may be used as part of the clinical decision support for the interpretation of genetic data, serving as a first step in the anticoagulation therapy decision making process. Here we used a publicly available warfarin dosing calculator (www.warfarindosing.org) to create an expanded gene-based warfarin dosing table, the CPMC-WD table that includes nine genetic variants in CYP2C9, VKORC1, and CYP4F2. Using two datasets, a European American cohort (EUA, n=73) and the Quebec Warfarin Cohort (QWC, n=769), we show that the CPMC-WD table more accurately predicts therapeutic dose than the FDA table (51 % vs 33 %, respectively, in the EUA, McNemar's two-sided p=0.02; 52 % vs 37 % in the QWC, p<1×10(-6)). It also outperforms both the standard of care 5 mg/day dosing (51 % vs 34 % in the EUA, p=0.04; 52 % vs 31 % in the QWC, p<1×10(-6)) as well as a clinical-only algorithm (51 % vs 38 % in the EUA, trend p=0.11; 52 % vs 45 % in the QWC, p=0.003). This table offers a valuable update to the PGx dosing guideline in the drug label.

Personalized genomic results: analysis of informational needs.

Use of genomic information in healthcare is increasing; however data on the needs of consumers of genomic information is limited. The Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative (CPMC) is a longitudinal study investigating the utility of personalized medicine. Participants receive results reflecting risk of common complex conditions and drug-gene pairs deemed actionable by an external review board. To explore the needs of individuals receiving genomic information we reviewed all genetic counseling sessions with CPMC participants. A retrospective qualitative review of notes from 157 genetic counseling inquiries was conducted. Notes were coded for salient themes. Five primary themes; "understanding risk", "basic genetics", "complex disease genetics", "what do I do now?" and "other" were identified. Further review revealed that participants had difficulty with basic genetic concepts, confused relative and absolute risks, and attributed too high a risk burden to individual single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). Despite these hurdles, counseled participants recognized that behavior changes could potentially mitigate risk and there were few comments alluding to an overly deterministic or fatalistic interpretation of results. Participants appeared to recognize the multifactorial nature of the diseases for which results were provided; however education to understand the complexities of genomic risk information was often needed.

A randomized trial of the clinical utility of genetic testing for obesity: design and implementation considerations.

BACKGROUND: Obesity rates in the United States have escalated in recent decades and present a major challenge in public health prevention efforts. Currently, testing to identify genetic risk for obesity is readily available through several direct-to-consumer companies. Despite the availability of this type of testing, there is a paucity of evidence as to whether providing people with personal genetic information on obesity risk will facilitate or impede desired behavioral responses. PURPOSE: We describe the key issues in the design and implementation of a randomized controlled trial examining the clinical utility of providing genetic risk information for obesity. METHODS: Participants are being recruited from the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative, an ongoing, longitudinal research cohort study designed to determine the utility of personal genome information in health management and clinical decision making. The primary focus of the ancillary Obesity Risk Communication Study is to determine whether genetic risk information added value to traditional communication efforts for obesity, which are based on lifestyle risk factors. The trial employs a 2 × 2 factorial design in order to examine the effects of providing genetic risk information for obesity, alone or in combination with lifestyle risk information, on participants' psychological responses, behavioral intentions, health behaviors, and weight. RESULTS: The factorial design generated four experimental arms based on communication of estimated risk to participants: (1) no risk feedback (control), (2) genetic risk only, (3) lifestyle risk only, and (4) both genetic and lifestyle risk (combined). Key issues in study design pertained to the selection of algorithms to estimate lifestyle risk and determination of information to be provided to participants assigned to each experimental arm to achieve a balance between clinical standards and methodological rigor. Following the launch of the trial in September 2011, implementation challenges pertaining to low enrollment and differential attrition became apparent and required immediate attention and modifications to the study protocol. Although monitoring of these efforts is ongoing, initial observations show a doubling of enrollment and reduced attrition. LIMITATIONS: The trial is evaluating the short-term impact of providing obesity risk information as participants are followed for only 3 months. This study is built upon the structure of an existing personalized medicine study wherein participants have been provided with genetic information for other diseases. This nesting in a larger study may attenuate the effects of obesity risk information and has implications for the generalizability of study findings. CONCLUSIONS: This randomized trial examines value of obesity genetic information, both when provided independently and when combined with lifestyle risk assessment, to motivate individuals to engage in healthy lifestyle behaviors. Study findings will guide future intervention efforts to effectively communicate genetic risk information.

"It's not like judgment day": public understanding of and reactions to personalized genomic risk information.

The value of genomic risk assessment depends upon patients making appropriate behavioral changes in response to increased risk leading to disease prevention and early detection. To date, few studies have investigated consumers' response to personalized genomic disease risk information. To address this gap, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 60 adults participating in the Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative. The interviews took place after receiving results providing genomic and other risk information for up to eight common complex diseases. We found that participants were most likely to recall results which conferred an increased risk or those of particular personal interest. Participants understood the multi-factorial nature of common complex disease, and generally did not have negative emotional responses or overly deterministic perceptions of their results. Although most participants expressed a desire to use results to improve their health, a minority had actually taken action (behavior change or shared results with their doctor) at the time of the interview. These results suggest that participants have a reasonable understanding of genomic risk information and that provision of genomic risk information may motivate behavior change in some individuals; however additional work is needed to better understand the lack of change seen in the majority of participants.

Incorporating direct-to-consumer genomic information into patient care: attitudes and experiences of primary care physicians.

AIM: Despite predictions of increased clinical applications, little is known about primary care providers' (PCPs') readiness to apply genomics to patient care. The aim was to assess PCPs' current experience with genetic testing, their assessment of the understandability and clinical utility of information in sample direct-to-consumer reports for genomic assessment of disease risk and warfarin dosing and attitudes toward genomic medicine. MATERIALS & METHODS: A web-based survey of PCPs who are members of Knowledge Networks' Physician Consulting Network was conducted. RESULTS: Of the 502 respondents (23.3% response rate), most ordered genetic tests infrequently. When presented with the direct-to-consumer genomic testing reports, most believed the reports were understandable, and would be willing to review results with a patient, and many believed the results would be helpful in patient management. CONCLUSION: Despite limited experience with genetic tests, PCPs are open to helping patients understand genomic information. However, additional physician education is needed.