PubMed Health⌕ Search

SEARCH · PubMed Health

Results for “Genetic testing”

Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 199 records · Page 11Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

Genetic testing for cancer predisposition.

Clinical cancer genetics is becoming an integral part of the care of cancer patients. This review describes the clinical aspects, genetics, and clinical genetic management of most of the major hereditary cancer susceptibility syndromes. Multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2, von Hippel-Lindau disease, and familial adenomatous polyposis are examples of syndromes for which genetic testing to identify at-risk family members is considered the standard of care. Genetic testing for these syndromes is sensitive and affordable, and it will change medical management. Cancer genetic counseling and testing is probably beneficial in other syndromes, such as the hereditary breast cancer syndromes, hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer syndrome, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, and juvenile polyposis. There are also hereditary cancer syndromes for which testing is not yet available and/or is unlikely to change medical management, including Li-Fraumeni syndrome and hereditary malignant melanoma. Thorough medical care requires the identification of families likely to have a hereditary cancer susceptibility syndrome for referral to cancer genetics professionals.

Breast Neoplasms↗
PubMed1995

Attitudes toward genetic testing among the general population and relatives of patients with a severe genetic disease: a survey from Finland.

In the present study we explore the attitudes of the Finnish population toward genetic testing by conducting a questionnaire study of a stratified sample of the population as well as of family members of patients with a severe hereditary disease, aspartylglucosaminuria (AGU). The questionnaire evaluated attitudes toward gene tests in general and also respondents' preparedness to undergo gene tests for predictive testing, carrier detection, prenatal diagnosis, and selective abortion, in theoretical situations. The results of the study indicate that both the Finnish population in general and family members of AGU patients have a favorable attitude toward genetic testing. However, a commonly expressed reason against testing was that test results might lead to discrimination in employment or insurance policies. Based on the responses, we predict that future genetic testing programs will most probably be met with a high acceptance rate by the Finnish population.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Genetic testing for hearing impairment.

For some patients, genetic testing can reveal the etiology of their hearing impairment, and can provide evidence for a medical diagnosis. However, a gap between fundamental genetic research on hereditary deafness and clinical otology emerges because of the steadily increasing number of discovered genes for hereditary hearing impairment (HHI) and the comparably low clinical differentiation of the HHIs. In an attempt to keep up with the scientific progress, this article enumerates the indications of genetic testing for HHI from a clinical point of view and describes the most frequently encountered HHIs in Belgium. Domains of recent scientific interest, molecular biological aspects, and some pitfalls with HHIs are highlighted. The overview comprises bilateral congenital hearing loss, late-onset progressive high frequency hearing loss, progressive bilateral cochleo-vestibular deficit, and progressive low frequency hearing loss. Also, several syndromal forms of HHI are summarized, and the availability of genetic tests mentioned. Finally, the requirements for successful linkage analysis, an important genetic research tool for localizing the potential genes of a trait on a chromosome, are briefly described.

Belgium↗
PubMed2002

[Multidisciplinary approach to genetic testing for hereditary neuromuscular diseases].

The benefit of genetic testing for hereditary neuromuscular diseases is accurate and rapid diagnosis. On the other hand, it raises several ethical, legal, and psychosocial issues because the test results may greatly influence the life plan or life style of the applicant. In particular, in case of predictive or prenatal genetic testing, or carrier detection for family relatives, careful genetic counseling and psychosocial support are needed for applicants. When requests for predictive or prenatal genetic testing, or carrier detection for healthy relatives are received, a multidisciplinary approach should be taken. A team that consists of a geneticist, neurologist, psychiatrist, psychologist, genetic nurse, and social worker should carefully conduct genetic counseling sessions. It is quite important to build effective communication and coordination of activities among the applicant, the applicant's family and members of the counseling team during pre-test counseling sessions. This will help applicants feel satisfied with their own decision as to whether they will receive genetic testing or not. Furthermore, it will help applicants cope with an unfavorable test result.

Genetic Counseling↗
PubMed2005

Detection of an MEN1 gene mutation depends on clinical features and supports current referral criteria for diagnostic molecular genetic testing.

OBJECTIVE: Diagnostic molecular genetic testing for multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1) has been available since the identification of the MEN1 gene in 1997. Mutation screening of the MEN1 gene has been recommended for patients who meet clinical criteria for MEN1 (at least two of the following: parathyroid hyperplasia, pancreatic endocrine tumour or pituitary adenoma) and those in whom a diagnosis of MEN1 is suspected. We examined the appropriateness of these clinical criteria. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 292 patients were referred for diagnostic testing. The coding region of the MEN1 gene was sequenced in 186 index cases and mutation testing was requested for 106 subjects, including 83 asymptomatic relatives. RESULTS: MEN1 gene mutations were identified in 68/186 index cases (37%). Twenty-nine of the 60 MEN1 mutations reported are novel. The likelihood of finding a mutation was correlated with the number of MEN1-related tumours (mutation detection rate of 79%, 37% and 15% in patients with three, two and one main MEN1-related tumours; P < or = 0.00001) and increased in the presence of a family history (mutation detection rate of 91%, 69% and 29%vs. 69%, 23% and 0% in sporadic cases with three, two or one main MEN1-related tumours, respectively; P < or = 0.00001). The pick-up rate in the 83% of subjects who met proposed criteria for diagnostic testing was 42%, but in those who did not meet these criteria this fell to 0%. CONCLUSIONS: The likelihood of finding an MEN1 mutation depends on the clinical features of the patient and their family. This large series supports present referral criteria for diagnostic mutation screening, but suggests that patients with sporadic isolated tumours rarely have MEN1 mutations.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2026

NF2-related Schwannomatosis Diagnosed Before and After 30 Years of Age: Differences in Disease Presentation and Rates of Positive Genetic Testing.

OBJECTIVE: Characterize pathogenic variants, rates of mosaicism, genetic testing yield, and disease severity among patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis dichotomized by diagnosis before or after the age of 30. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Tertiary referral center multidisciplinary NF2 clinic from 2021 to 2024. PATIENTS: Patients with NF2-related schwannomatosis. INTERVENTION: Next-generation sequencing. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Rates of mosaicism, genetic testing rates and yield, and overall disease severity by tumor burden. RESULTS: From 2021 to 2024, there were 32 patients &#x2265;30 years of age and 39 patients diagnosed at younger ages. Patients diagnosed &#x2265;30 years exhibited decreased likelihood of receiving genetic testing (53% vs. 85%; P =0.009) and decreased genetic yield (defined as identification of a pathogenic genetic variant in those undergoing testing; 65% vs. 85%; P =0.20). Both age groups demonstrated similar rates of pathogenic variant type with loss-of-function being the predominant variant detected in 73% vs. 67%, for &#x2265;30 vs. <30 years of age; P =0.90. Those &#x2265;30 years harbored fewer number of average anatomic regions involved by tumor (2.3 vs. 3.4; P <0.001) and decreased total number of tumors (7 vs. 12; P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients diagnosed with NF2-related schwannomatosis at age &#x2265;30 years exhibited reduced disease severity compared with those diagnosed at a younger age despite harboring similar distributions of genetic pathogenic variants inclusive of loss-of-function pathogenic variants. These observations emphasize the importance of considering patient age in addition to genetic testing for diagnostic framing tailored to patients' biology and clinical context to optimize care in the setting of NF2-related schwannomatosis.

Humans↗
PubMed2006

Better the devil you know? High-risk individuals' anticipated psychological responses to genetic testing for melanoma susceptibility.

PURPOSE: The psychological consequences of genetic testing for mutations among individuals at increased risk of developing melanoma remain unexamined. The present study aimed to explore anticipated emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and familial responses to hypothetical genetic testing for melanoma susceptibility. METHODS: Forty semi-structured interviews were undertaken with affected (n=20) and unaffected (n=20) individuals at either high or average risk of developing melanoma due to family history. RESULTS: In-depth thematic analysis revealed that, in response to being identified as a mutation carrier, most participants with a family history anticipated calmly accepting their increased risk; either increasing precaution adoption or maintaining already vigilant behavioral practices; perceiving such information as important and valuable; and communicating genetic test results to family members, despite the acknowledgement of potential difficulties. In response to being identified as a non-carrier, the majority of participants expected to feel relieved; to maintain current precautionary health practices; to still perceive themselves at some risk of developing melanoma; and to be wary of the potential negative behavioral consequences of disclosing such information to family members. Women appeared more likely than men to acknowledge the potential for depression and worry following genetic testing. In contrast, more males than females expected to carry a gene mutation, and viewed their current preventive practices as optimum. CONCLUSION: Genetic testing for melanoma risk is likely to elicit a complex array of emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and familial responses for both testees and their family members, and these responses are likely to bear subtle differences for males and females.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Personnel standards and quality assurance practices of biochemical genetic testing laboratories in the United States.

CONTEXT: It has been suggested that specific regulation of laboratories performing genetic testing may be needed to ensure standards and quality assurance, and to safeguard the rights of patients with regard to confidentiality and providing informed consent. Previously, a comprehensive analysis of current practices of molecular genetic testing laboratories was conducted, the results of which have assisted in the assessment of the need for regulation and its impact on access to testing. However, a study designed to determine clinical laboratory practices with regard to biochemical genetic testing has not been carried out. OBJECTIVE: To collect and analyze data regarding availability of clinical biochemical genetic testing, personnel standards, and laboratory quality assurance practices. DESIGN: A mail survey of biochemical genetic testing laboratory directors and assignment of a quality assurance score based on responses to genetic testing process items. SETTING: Hospital-based, independent, and research-based biochemical genetic testing laboratories in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Directors of biochemical genetic testing laboratories (n = 133; response rate 68.5%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Laboratory process quality assurance score based on the standards defined by the American College of Medical Genetics Laboratory Practice Committee. RESULTS: Personnel qualifications varied, although all directors had doctoral degrees. The mean quality assurance score was 77% (range 28%-100%). Higher scores were associated with the following variables: test director having an MD degree versus PhD degree (P = .002), director board certification in biochemical genetics (P = .002), research and hospital laboratory versus independent laboratory setting (P < .001), and participation in a proficiency testing program (P = .03). Twelve percent of participants had a confidentiality policy, and 19% required informed consent before testing. CONCLUSION: The finding that a number of laboratories had quality assurance scores that may reflect suboptimal laboratory practices, particularly with regard to reporting practices, suggests that personnel qualification and laboratory practice standards may be in need of improvement to ensure quality in clinical biochemical genetic testing laboratories, as well as the appropriate clinical use of the test results.

Genetic Diseases, Inborn↗
PubMed2003

The implications of genetic testing for deafness.

Using modern biotechnology, it is increasingly common that genes can be identified and characterized, their protein products can be understood and tests to identify changes in these genes that lead to disease can be developed. Genetic tests are rapidly being introduced into clinical practice. Although there are many clinical benefits of genetic testing for a variety of medical conditions, there are also important practical and ethical concerns about the applications of genetic testing. The recent introduction of genetic tests for common forms of hereditary deafness (see also Rehm, 2003, in this issue) also promises many clinical benefits. Many of the same ethical concerns for genetic testing in general, also apply to genetic testing for deafness, with the added concerns brought about by the existence of the linguistic and cultural differences of the Deaf community. Sensitive genetic counseling performed by skilled geneticists is an important part of the genetic testing process to ensure that families and individuals can make informed choices regarding the use of genetic testing.

Deafness↗
PubMed2005

Attitudes and misconceptions about predictive genetic testing for cancer risk.

OBJECTIVE: To describe awareness, knowledge, and attitudes about genetic testing for cancer risk among the general public. RESULTS: Thirty-eight adults participated in focus groups in West Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Participants' beliefs about what genetic testing is ranged from 'dianetics' to an accurate description of DNA analysis. Themes included misconceptions about genetic tests, the ability to gain control of one's life through genetic testing, anxiety that might be caused by testing, risk of insurance and employment discrimination, use of genetic information for racial or ethnic discrimination, concerns about medical information confidentiality and lack of informed consent. CONCLUSIONS: Although there was some accurate understanding of what genetic testing is and how the results could be used, there also exist significant misconceptions. In many cases, misconceptions may be barriers to uptake of genetic testing. Dispelling these misconceptions is an important step in the translation of advances in human genomics into improvements in health.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

A focus group study of consumer attitudes toward genetic testing and newborn screening for deafness.

PURPOSE: Progress in identifying genes for deafness together with implementation of universal audiologic screening of newborns has provided the opportunity for more widespread use of molecular tests to detect genetic forms of hearing loss. Efforts to assess consumer attitudes toward these advances have lagged behind. METHODS: Consumer focus groups were held to explore attitudes toward genetic advances and technologies for hearing loss, views about newborn hearing screening, and reactions to the idea of adding molecular screening for hearing loss at birth. Focus group discussions were recorded, transcribed and analyzed. RESULTS: Five focus groups with 44 participants including hearing parents of deaf children, deaf parents and young deaf adults were held. Focus group participants supported the use of genetic tests to identify the etiology of hearing loss but were concerned that genetic information might influence reproductive decisions. Molecular newborn screening was advocated by some; however, others expressed concern about its effectiveness. CONCLUSION: Documenting the attitudes of parents and other consumers toward genetic technologies establishes the framework for discussions on the appropriateness of molecular newborn screening for hearing loss and informs specialists about potential areas of public education necessary prior to the implementation of such screening.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

What would you do? Specialists' perspectives on cancer genetic testing, prophylactic surgery, and insurance discrimination.

PURPOSE: To examine what cancer genetics specialists predict they would do personally if they were at 50% risk of carrying a mutation that predisposes to hereditary breast/ovarian cancer (BRCA1/BRCA2) and hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC). METHODS: Questionnaire survey of the membership of the National Society of Genetic Counselors (NSGC) Special Interest Group (SIG) in Cancer. RESULTS: Of the 296 active members of the NSGC Cancer-SIG surveyed, 163 (55%) responded. Eighty-five percent predicted that if they had a 50% risk of carrying a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation, they would pursue genetic testing. If they tested positive for a mutation at age 35, 25% predicted they would pursue prophylactic bilateral mastectomies and 68%, prophylactic oophorectomy. Ninety-one percent of respondents believe they would pursue genetic testing for HNPCC, and 17% would elect prophylactic colectomy; 54%, prophylactic hysterectomy; and 52%, prophylactic oophorectomy if they tested positive for a mutation. The majority (68%) would not bill their insurance companies for genetic testing because of fear of discrimination, and 26% would use an alias when undergoing testing. Fifty-seven percent of counselors would seek professional psychologic support to help them cope with the results of testing. CONCLUSION: A large percentage of cancer genetic counseling providers predicted they would opt for prophylactic surgery at a young age if they carried a BRCA or HNPCC mutation, and most would seek professional psychologic assistance when undergoing testing. More than half of respondents would not bill their insurance companies for genetic testing, largely because of fear of genetic discrimination. The vast majority of those providers most familiar with cancer genetic testing and its associated medical, psychologic, and legal implications would still pursue genetic testing.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Effect of clinical phenotype on yield of long QT syndrome genetic testing.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of clinical phenotype on the yield of genetic testing for congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS). BACKGROUND: Since the discovery of the first LQTS susceptibility genes in 1995, numerous genotype-phenotype relationships have emerged during the past decade of research genetic testing. In May 2004, LQTS genetic testing became a clinically available molecular diagnostic test. METHODS: Blinded to genetic test results, analysis of the clinical phenotype was performed in 541 consecutive unrelated patients referred to Mayo Clinic's Sudden Death Genomics Laboratory for LQTS genetic testing from August 1997 to July 2004. RESULTS: The yield of genetic testing correlated significantly with the corrected QT interval (QTc) and clinical diagnostic score ranging from 0% when QTc was <400 ms to 62% when QTc was >480 ms (p < 0.0001). Among those with the highest clinical probability, the yield was 72% (89 of 123). The yield fluctuated substantially depending on age at diagnosis in males. Among physicians who referred > or =5 patients, the yield ranged from 0% to 80% (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of unrelated patients referred for LQTS genetic testing, the clinical phenotype strongly correlated with the likelihood of elucidating a pathogenic mutation with the cardiac channel gene screen.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2005

Genetic testing for colon cancer among African-Americans in North Carolina.

OBJECTIVE: To describe attitudes and correlates of intention to take a genetic test for colon cancer in a population-based sample of African-Americans. METHODS: African-Americans (n = 658), age 18-70, in North Carolina completed an 11-page questionnaire between June-October 2003 that assessed attitudes (familiarity, perceived benefits and risks, anxiety, and confidentiality) and intention to take a genetic test for colon cancer and various participant characteristics. RESULTS: Respondents expressed favorable attitudes and high intention regarding genetic testing for colon cancer: 87% would definitely/probably take a genetic test, although only 42% had read/heard a lot or some about genetic testing. Most agreed that genetic test results should be available to healthcare providers (79%) but not to health insurers (62%) or employers (82%). About a third were concerned that genetic testing could lead to discrimination. Correlates of intention differed by sex. Perceived benefits were significantly positively associated with intention among all respondents. However, being married (OR = 2.1, 95% CI: 1.2, 3.7), doctor as the main source of health information (OR = 2.4, 95% CI: 1.4, 3.9), and colon cancer family history (OR = 4.3, 95% CI: 1.6, 11.6) were significant only for women; some college education (OR = 4.1, 95% CI: 1.7, 9.7), importance of sharing test results with relatives (OR = 5.5, 95% CI: 1.6, 18.7), and colon cancer screening history (OR = 3.4, 95% CI: 1.6, 7.5) were only significant for men. CONCLUSIONS: Respondents expressed high interest in genetic testing for colon cancer risk, although confidentiality of test results is a concern. Guidelines and policies for genetic testing specific to African-Americans should be established and future research should examine the prevalence of genetic testing.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1998

Attitudes towards genetic testing: analysis of contradictions.

A survey study was conducted among 1169 people to evaluate attitudes towards genetic testing in Finland. Here we present an analysis of the contradictions detected in people's attitudes towards genetic testing. This analysis focuses on the approval of genetic testing as an individual choice and on the confidence in control of the process of genetic testing and its implications. Our analysis indicated that some of the respondents have contradictory attitudes towards genetic testing. It is proposed that contradictory attitudes towards genetic testing should be given greater significance both in scientific studies on attitudes towards genetic testing as well as in the health care context, e.g. in genetic counselling.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2004

Ensuring the appropriate use of genetic tests.

Ensuring the correct use of genetic tests is an important challenge for health-policy makers. Many new genetic tests will identify susceptibility to common diseases or adverse drug responses. Some will lead to new prevention opportunities, but others will have minimal clinical value. Statutory regulation alone cannot guarantee appropriate use. Other strategies, including resource allocation and matters related to clinical governance - such as practice-guideline development and health-provider education - are also important.

Disease Susceptibility↗
PubMed2024

High yield of monogenic short stature in children from Kurdistan, Iraq: A genetic testing algorithm for consanguineous families.

PURPOSE: Genetic testing in consanguineous families advances the general comprehension of pathophysiological pathways. However, short stature (SS) genetics remain unexplored in a defined consanguineous cohort. This study examines a unique pediatric cohort from Sulaimani, Iraq, aiming to inspire a genetic testing algorithm for similar populations. METHODS: Among 280 SS referrals from 2018-2020, 64 children met inclusion criteria (from consanguineous families; height &#x2264;&#xa0;-2.25 SD), 51 provided informed consent (30 females; 31 syndromic SS) and underwent investigation, primarily via exome sequencing. Prioritized variants were evaluated by the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics standards. A comparative analysis was conducted by juxtaposing our findings against published gene panels for SS. RESULTS: A genetic cause of SS was elucidated in 31 of 51 (61%) participants. Pathogenic variants were found in genes involved in the GH-IGF-1 axis (GHR and SOX3), thyroid axis (TSHR), growth plate (CTSK, COL1A2, COL10A1, DYM, FN1, LTBP3, MMP13, NPR2, and SHOX), signal transduction (PTPN11), DNA/RNA replication (DNAJC21, GZF1, and LIG4), cytoskeletal structure (CCDC8, FLNA, and PCNT), transmembrane transport (SLC34A3 and SLC7A7), enzyme coding (CYP27B1, GALNS, and GNPTG), and ciliogenesis (CFAP410). Two additional participants had Silver-Russell syndrome and 1 had del22q.11.21. Syndromic SS was predictive in identifying a monogenic condition. Using a gene panel would yield positive results in only 10% to 33% of cases. CONCLUSION: A tailored testing strategy is essential to increase diagnostic yield in children with SS from consanguineous populations.

Humans↗