Bringing Genetics Home.

The promise of human genetics and genomics is nothing less than a fully tailored life, starting with medical treatments, diets, and preventative care all styled around a single genome. There's a lighter side as well where consumer genomics companies are helping people understand themselves and their families. Lara Szewczak spoke with Catherine Ball, Chief Scientific Officer at Ancestry, about the science of consumer genomics and what it might mean for an individual to take charge of their own sequence. Excerpts from this conversation are presented below, and the full conversation is available with the article online.

A New Wave of Genomics for All.

Millions of people have taken direct-to-consumer DNA tests, but not everyone is happy with the status quo. Several startups in the genetic testing space are aiming to empower individuals and build communities in order to boost research and, ultimately, public health.

Avoiding Liability and Other Legal Land Mines in the Evolving Genomics Landscape.

This article reviews evolving legal implications for clinicians and researchers as genomics is used more widely in both the clinic and in translational research, reflecting rapid changes in scientific knowledge as well as the surrounding cultural and political environment. Professionals will face new and changing duties to make or act upon a genetic diagnosis, address direct-to-consumer genetic testing in patient care, consider the health implications of results for patients' family members, and recontact patients when test results change over time. Professional duties in reproductive genetic testing will need to be recalibrated in response to disruptive changes to reproductive rights in the United States. We also review the debate over who controls the flow of genetic information and who is responsible for its protection, considering the globally influential European Union General Data Protection Regulation and the rapidly evolving data privacy law landscape of the United States.

Family secrets: Experiences and outcomes of participating in direct-to-consumer genetic relative-finder services.

In recent decades, genetic genealogy has become popular as a result of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing. Some DTC genetic testing companies offer genetic relative-finder (GRF) services that compare the DNA of consenting participants to identify genetic relatives among them and provide each participant a list of their relative matches. We surveyed a convenience sample of GRF service participants to understand the prevalence of discoveries and associated experiences. Almost half (46%) of the 23,196 respondents had participated in GRF services only for non-specific reasons that included interest in building family trees and general curiosity. However, most (82%) also learned the identity of at least one genetic relative. Separately, most respondents (61%) reported learning something new about themselves or their relatives, including potentially disruptive information such as that a person they believed to be their biological parent is in fact not or that they have a sibling they had not known about. Respondents generally reported that discovering this new information had a neutral or positive impact on their lives, and most had low regret regarding their decision to participate in GRF services. Yet some reported making life changes as a result of their discoveries. Compared to respondents making other types of discoveries, those who learned that they were donor conceived reported the highest decisional regret and represented the largest proportion reporting net-negative consequences for themselves. Our findings indicate that discoveries from GRF services may be common and that the consequences for individuals, while generally positive, can be far-reaching and complex.

Findings from the First Year of a Federally Funded, Direct-to-Consumer HIV Self-Test Distribution Program - United States, March 2023-March 2024.

In September 2022, CDC funded a nationwide program, Together TakeMeHome (TTMH), to expand distribution of HIV self-tests (HIVSTs) directly to consumers by mail through an online ordering portal. To publicize the availability of HIVSTs to priority audiences, particularly those disproportionately affected by HIV, CDC promoted this program through established partnerships and tailored resources from its Let's Stop HIV Together social marketing campaign. The online portal launched March 14, 2023, and through March 13, 2024, distributed 443,813 tests to 219,360 persons. Among 169,623 persons who answered at least one question on a postorder questionnaire, 67.9% of respondents were from priority audiences, 24.1% had never previously received testing for HIV, and 24.8% had not received testing in the past year. Among the subset of participants who initiated a follow-up survey, 88.3% used an HIVST themselves, 27.1% gave away an HIVST, 11.7% accessed additional preventive services, and 1.9% reported a new positive HIVST result. Mailed HIVST distribution can quickly reach large numbers of persons who have never received testing for HIV or have not received testing as often as is recommended. TTMH can help to achieve the goal of diagnosing HIV as early as possible and provides a path to other HIV prevention and care services. Clinicians, community organizations, and public health officials should be aware of HIVST programs, initiate discussions about HIV testing conducted outside their clinics or offices, and initiate follow-up services for persons who report a positive or negative HIVST result.

Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Value and Risk.

Although the explosive growth of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing has moderated, a substantial number of patients are choosing to undergo genetic testing outside the purview of their regular healthcare providers. Further, many industry leaders have been expanding reports to cover many more genes, as well as partnering with employers and others to expand access. This review addresses continuing concerns about DTC genetic testing quality, psychosocial impact, integration with medical practice, effects on the healthcare system, and privacy, as well as emerging concerns about third-party interpretation services and non-health-related uses such as investigative genetic genealogy. It concludes with an examination of two possible futures for DTC genetic testing: merger with traditional modes of healthcare delivery or continuation as a parallel system for patient-driven generation of health-relevant information. Each possibility is associated with distinctive questions related to value and risk.

Direct-to-consumer genetic tests providing health risk information: A systematic review of consequences for consumers and health services.

Direct-to-consumer genetic tests (DTC-GT) offer a variety of genetic health risk information. Understanding evidence of impacts is required for effective policy to protect consumers and healthcare services. We undertook a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines, searching five literature databases for articles assessing analytic or clinical validity, or reporting consumer or healthcare professional experience with health risk information derived from DTC-GT, published between November 2014 and July 2020. We performed a thematic synthesis to identify descriptive and analytical themes. Forty-three papers met inclusion criteria. Many consumers submit raw DTC-GT data for third-party interpretation (TPI). DTC-GT sometimes report 'false positive' or incorrectly interpreted rare variants, or that such information can result from TPI. Consumers have high expectations of DTC-GT and TPI, and are broadly satisfied, although many do not act on results. A minority of consumers experience adverse psychological impacts. Healthcare consultations can be complex, and professionals have reservations about the validity and utility of DTC-GT-derived information. The contrast between consumer and health professional perceptions can result in mutual dissatisfaction with consultations. Health risk information from DTC-GT and TPI is broadly valued by consumers but presents complex challenges for healthcare services and some consumers.

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.

Searching for secrets, searching for self: Childhood adversity, self-concept clarity, and the motivation to uncover family secrets through direct-to-consumer genetic testing.

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests have become an attractive product for those hoping to gain insight into their health, ancestry, and biological relatedness. In some cases, test results are unexpected, and lead to the revelation of previously undisclosed family secrets. A subset of individuals may pursue testing explicitly for this purpose; however, the psychosocial processes underlying this motivation remain unexamined. Grounded in the literature on family secrecy, trauma, and the development of self-concept, we tested a hypothesized mediation model to provide insight into this motivation among a sample of 433 individuals in pursuit of DTC genetic testing. In line with the documented association between maladaptive family communication patterns and trauma exposure in childhood, we found that exposure to adverse childhood experiences was associated with the motivation to pursue DTC genetic testing for the purpose of uncovering family secrets. We also found evidence of an indirect effect through reduced self-concept clarity. These findings suggest that impaired identity formation processes may have played a role in transmitting the effect. Furthermore, the findings highlight a novel way in which family histories may contribute to DTC genetic testing motivations. Future examination of these and other psychosocial phenomena that contribute to DTC genetic testing will be crucial to consider as the tests become increasingly accessible, and as the information they can provide becomes increasingly comprehensive. Findings from this line of research could help to identify for whom and under what conditions DTC genetic testing benefits well-being, and the conditions under which the act of testing and receipt of results could have adverse psychosocial effects. These insights will be of interest to genetic counselors working in the field of DTC genetic testing, and those working with individuals and families affected by unexpected test results.

The epistemic harms of direct-to-consumer genetic tests.

In this paper, I provide an epistemic evaluation of the harms that result from the widespread marketing of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic tests. While genetic tests are a valuable accessory diagnostic tool when ordered by a medical practitioner, there are different implications when they are sold directly to consumers. I aim to show that there are both epistemic and non-epistemic harms associated with the widespread commoditization of DTC genetic tests. I argue that the epistemic harms produced by DTC genetic tests have been disregarded in discussions on the topic. Drawing on the notion of contributory epistemic injustices, I highlight two pertinent epistemic harms: (1) a failure to uptake an individual's articulations about their identity and (2) the presiding reductionist framework dismisses useful hermeneutical resources. I then propose ways to mitigate these harms.

Community-led risk analysis of direct-to-consumer whole-genome sequencing.

Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing is cheaper and more accessible than ever before; however, the intention to combine, reuse, and resell this genetic information as powerful data sets is generally hidden from the consumer. This financial gain is creating a competitive DTC market, reducing the price of whole-genome sequencing (WGS) to under 300 USD. Entering this transition from single-nucleotide polymorphism-based DTC testing to WGS DTC testing, individuals looking for access to their whole-genomic information face new privacy and security risks. Differences between WGS and other methods of consumer genetic tests are left unexplored by regulation, leading to the application of legal data anonymization methods on whole-genome data, and questionable consent methods. Large representative genomic data sets are important for research and improve the standard of medicine and personalized care. However, these data can also be used by market players, law enforcement, and governments for surveillance, population analyses, marketing purposes, and discrimination. Here, we present a summary of the state of WGS DTC genetic testing and its current regulation, through a community-based lens to expose dual-use risks in consumer-facing biotechnologies.

Third-Party Genetic Interpretation Tools: A Mixed-Methods Study of Consumer Motivation and Behavior.

In an effort to meet ethical obligations and/or participant expectations, researchers may consider offering "raw" or uninterpreted genetic data for result return. It is therefore important to understand the motivations, behaviors, and perspectives of individuals who might choose to access raw data before such return becomes routine. In the direct-to-consumer (DTC) context, where raw data are often made available to customers, the use of third-party interpretation tools has raised concerns about genotype accuracy, data privacy, reliability of interpretation, and consumption of limited health care resources. However, relatively little is known about why individuals access raw data or what they do with the information received from third-party interpretation. Accordingly, we conducted a survey on raw data access and third-party tool usage among 1,137 DTC customers recruited through social media. Most survey respondents (89%) reported downloading their raw data. Among downloaders, 94% used at least one tool, most commonly Promethease (63%) or GEDmatch (84%). More than half (56%) used both health-related and non-health-related tools and differed significantly from those who used only one tool type in terms of demographics, participation in research, DTC tests ordered, and testing motivations. Exploratory interviews were conducted with 10 respondents and illustrated how social networking, initial lack of interesting findings, and general curiosity contributed to use of multiple tool types. These results suggest that even when initially motivated by ancestry and genealogy, consumers frequently also pursue health information in a largely unregulated and expanding suite of third-party tools, raising both challenges and opportunities for the professional genetics community.

Development of a Checklist Tool to Assess the Quality of Skin Lesion Images Acquired by Consumers Using Sequential Mobile Teledermoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Mobile teledermoscopy is an emerging technology that involves imaging and digitally sending dermoscopic images of skin lesions to a clinician for assessment. High-quality, consistent images are required for accurate telediagnoses when monitoring lesions over time. To date there are no tools to assess the quality of sequential images taken by consumers using mobile teledermoscopy. The purpose of this study was to develop a tool to assess the quality of images acquired by consumers. METHODS: Participants imaged skin lesions that they felt were concerning at baseline, 1-, and 2-months. A checklist to assess the quality of consumer sequential imaging of skin lesions was developed based on the International Skin Imaging Collaboration guidelines. A scale was implemented to grade the quality of the images: 0 (low) to 18 (very high). Intra- and inter-reliability of the checklist was assessed using Bland-Altman analysis. Using this checklist, the consistency with which 85 sets of images were scored by 2 evaluators were compared using Kappa statistics. Items with a low Kappa value <0.4 were removed. RESULTS: After reliability testing, 5 of the items were removed due to low Kappa values (<0.4) and the final checklist included 13 items surveying: lesion selection; image orientation; lighting; field of view; focus and depth of view. Participants had a mean age of 41 years (range 19-73), and 67% were female. Most participants (84%, n = 71/85) were able to select and image the correct lesion over time for both the dermoscopic and overview images. Younger participants (<40 years old) scored significantly higher (8.1 ± 2.1) on the imaging checklist compared to older participants (7.1 ± 2.4; p = 0.037). Participants had most difficulty with consistent image orientation. CONCLUSIONS: This checklist could be used as a triage tool to filter images acquired by consumers prior to telediagnosis evaluation, which would improve the efficiency and accuracy of teledermatology and teledermoscopy processes. It may also be used to provide feedback to the consumers to improve image acquisition over time.

From proband to provider: is there an obligation to inform genetic relatives of actionable risks discovered through direct-to-consumer genetic testing?

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing is a growing phenomenon, fuelled by the notion that knowledge equals control. One ethical question that arises concerns the proband's duty to share information indicating genetic risks in their relatives. However, such duties are unenforceable and may result in the realisation of anticipated harm to relatives. We argue for a shift in responsibility from proband to provider, placing a duty on test providers in the event of identified actionable risks to relatives. Starting from Parker and Lucassen's (2004) 'joint account model', we adapt Kilbride's (2018) application of the rule of rescue and balance it against the relative's right not to know, placing responsibility on the providers of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Where the risk of disease to a relative is actionable, we argue providers ought to share results even in the face of the proband's objections. Confidentiality issues are navigated by a pre-emptive consent model, whereby consumers agree to the sharing of certain information with their relatives ahead of testing and as a condition of testing. When a relative is informed, the proband's privacy is protected by maximal deidentification, and the rights of the relative are met by a stepwise approach to informing that allows them to decide how much information they receive.

Issues surrounding consumer-bought food-allergy testing.

BACKGROUND: Allergy is increasingly reported by patients and members of the public, and there is evidence that the prevalence is increasing. Not all diagnoses have been made by clinicians, as direct-to-consumer (DTC) allergy tests are widely available online. AIM: To determine if DTC allergy tests are processed in accredited laboratories and utilize validated methods, while providing an overview of the DTC allergy tests available. METHODS: Internet searches using 'allergy test kit' and 'intolerance test' were performed to identify DTC food-allergy tests. Each company was contacted to enquire if they had ISO15189 accreditation, what methods of testing they used and what was the extent of individual clinical input used to guide the test requested or result interpretation. RESULTS: In total, 24 online companies providing DTC food-allergy testing were identified, of which 22 were contactable. One laboratory had ISO15189 accreditation, which was also the only laboratory using clinically recognized specific IgE testing and had a clinician involved in the process. Other laboratories used bioresonance or IgG and involved a nutritionist at most. CONCLUSION: Online DTC food-allergy tests are largely misleading to the consumer and provided by unaccredited laboratories using controversial methodology. The dermatologist must politely discount these results and assess the role of food allergy in a patient's skin disease on the merit of clinical history, supported by specific IgE testing as appropriate.

Experiences of adolescents and their parents after receiving adolescents' genomic screening results.

There has been considerable debate over whether adolescents should have the opportunity to learn genetic information about adult-onset disease risk and carrier status without a clinical indication. Adolescents face increasing opportunities to learn more about such genetic risks through the return of secondary findings from clinical genomic testing, direct-to-consumer genetic testing, and research opportunities. However, little is known about the perspectives of adolescents who have received genomic screening results. We conducted separate qualitative interviews with 15 adolescents and their parents who enrolled in a research protocol where they decided which genomic screening results to receive for the adolescent for up to 32 conditions informed by 84 genes. The goal of these interviews was to explore the impact of adolescents learning genomic results without a clinical indication for screening. Of the participating dyads, four received positive results for a pathogenic/likely pathogenic (P/LP) variant for an autosomal dominant (AD) condition, five received carrier results for a heterozygous P/LP variant for an autosomal recessive (AR) condition, and six received negative results. An interpretive descriptive qualitative approach was used. Interview transcripts were coded using a guide developed by the study team based on themes that emerged from the interviews. Degree of recall and description of results, actionability, and emotional responses differed according to the types of results received. However, all participants were satisfied with their decision to learn results, and most did not report any lasting psychological harms. Participants adapted to genomic information about themselves, even after learning about unexpected increased risk for future health problems. Our findings support the position that, whenever possible, perspectives and wishes of adolescents should be strongly considered and respected in the decision-making process regarding genetic testing.

Cases in Precision Medicine: Genetic Testing to Predict Future Risk for Disease in a Healthy Patient.

Genetic testing is performed more routinely in clinical practice, and direct-to-consumer tests are widely available. It has obvious appeal as a preventive health measure. Clinicians and their healthy patients increasingly inquire about genetic testing as a tool for predicting diseases, such as cancer, heart disease, or dementia. Despite demonstrated utility for diagnosis in the setting of many diseases, genetic testing still has many limitations as a predictive tool for healthy persons. This article uses a hypothetical case to review key considerations for predictive genetic testing.

How to Approach Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing With Your Patients.

Direct-to-consumer genetic testing (DTC-GT) is genetic testing initiated by a consumer through a commercial company without the direct involvement of a physician or genetics professional. DTC-GT companies have developed tests that provide information about one's ancestry, carrier status, and risk to develop certain conditions. As more consumers participate in DTC-GT, primary care providers (PCPs) are at a greater chance to encounter DTC-GT results and conversations in their practice. PCPs often do not have specialized genetics training and may not feel equipped to engage in a discussion about DTC-GT, but they are well-positioned to explore the perceived benefits and limitations of DTC-GT with their patients. Limitations of DTC-GT include risk for false positive or false negative results, risk for unintended information, and risk for privacy invasion. We provide a resource for PCPs to use when approaching the topic of DTC-GT with their patients including how to discuss motivations for pursuing and concerns about DTC-GT, as well as the limitations and implications of this testing. We hope this resource can guide fruitful conversations between PCPs and patients who are looking for support from their trusted physician while considering DTC-GT or interpreting their results.

Outpatient Primary Care Genetic Testing Primer: What to Order and Testing Considerations.

The field of genetics has evolved rapidly over the last few decades, from testing methods to genetic diagnoses, bringing new genetic testing guidelines and considerations for health care providers. Overall geneticists are limited in number and availability, particularly in non-academic settings, and many patients first present to a primary care provider. Here, we aim to review various modalities of genetic testing, their indications, limitations, and other pretest considerations for the primary care provider. In addition, we comment on the limitations of direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, which has seen a rise in popularity among the general population.

Detection of Tachyarrhythmias in a Large Cohort of Infants Using Direct-to-Consumer Heart Rate Monitoring.

OBJECTIVE: Current estimates of the incidence of tachyarrhythmias in infants rely on clinical documentation and may not reflect the true rate in the general population. Our aim was to describe the epidemiology of tachyarrhythmia detected in a large cohort of infants using direct-to-consumer heart rate (HR) monitoring. STUDY DESIGN: Data were collected from Owlet Smart Sock devices used in infants in the US with birthdates between February 2017 and February 2019. We queried the HR data for episodes of tachyarrhythmia (HR of ≥240 bpm for >60 seconds). RESULTS: The study included 100 949 infants (50.8% male) monitored for more than 200 million total hours. We identified 5070 episodes of tachyarrhythmia in 2508 infants. The cumulative incidence of tachyarrhythmia in our cohort was 2.5% over the first year of life. The median age at the time of the first episode of tachyarrhythmia was 36 days (range, 1-358 days). Tachyarrhythmia was more common in infants with congenital heart disease (4.0% vs 2.4%; P = .015) and in females (2.7% vs 2.0%; P < .001). The median length of an episode was 7.3 minutes (range, 60 seconds to 5.4 hours) and the probability of an episode lasting longer than 45 minutes was 16.8% (95% CI, 15.4%-18.3%). CONCLUSIONS: We found the cumulative incidence of tachyarrhythmia among infants using direct-to-consumer HR monitors to be higher than previously reported in studies relying on clinical diagnosis. This finding may represent previously undetected subclinical disease in young infants, the significance of which remains uncertain. Clinicians should be prepared to discuss these events with parents.