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 721 records · Page 40Linked to original sources

Molecular genetic testing for prenatal diagnosis.

In the past few decades, enormous progress has been made in the field of prenatal molecular genetic testing. Based on the inheritance patterns of the disease and type of mutation, prenatal diagnosis is possible using direct or indirect methods of detection. Although direct mutation analysis is highly accurate, accuracy of indirect mutation analysis depends on the distance of the DNA marker to the disease locus. In the past decade, the discovery of new concepts--such as atypical inheritance patterns due to UPD and imprinting and triplet repeat disorders--have helped to increase understanding of the molecular basis of these unusual genetic disorders. Prenatal diagnosis using a single cell from a blastomere is rapidly becoming routine in clinical practice. Noninvasive procedures to obtain fetal DNA for molecular testing also are progressing very rapidly. With the completion of the genome project, resources now are available for developing new technologies, such as microarrays (DNA chips), for accurate, simultaneous, mutation detection. The next few decades hold the promise of many more advances in genetic testing, drug discovery, and therapy.

Adult↗

Understanding genetic testing for Alzheimer disease: medical and epidemiological background.

To assess the potential benefits and risks of genetic testing for Alzheimer disease (AD), patients and families, health care providers, and policymakers must understand the medical and epidemiologic aspects of the disease. This paper provides a brief overview of the symptoms, progression, and etiology of AD, as well as of the prevalence and incidence of the disease. The established and the controversial risk factors thought to be associated with the development of AD are described. Current methods for diagnosing and treating AD are also reviewed.

Aged↗

Colon cancer screening practices following genetic testing for hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) mutations.

BACKGROUND: Although increased colonoscopic surveillance is recommended for hereditary nonpolyposis colon cancer (HNPCC) mutation carriers, limited information is available on adherence to colorectal cancer screening recommendations. This study investigated colonoscopy practices following genetic testing for HNPCC mutations. METHODS: This prospective cohort study was conducted between May 22, 1996, and November 13, 1999. Participants were 98 men and women without a personal history of colon cancer or colectomy who were identified from 11 extended HNPCC families. Colonoscopy use was evaluated by telephone before genetic counseling and was reassessed 1, 6, and 12 months following test results disclosure. RESULTS: During the 12 months following genetic counseling and testing, 73% (16/22) of HNPCC mutation carriers, 16% (8/49) of noncarriers, and 22% (6/27) of decliners reported having a colonoscopy (chi(2) = 23.97, P<.001). After controlling for clinical factors and pretest screening practices, HNPCC mutation carriers were significantly more likely than test decliners to have a colonoscopy (odds ratio [OR], 12.12; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.42-42.96; P<.001). There were no differences in colonoscopy use between noncarriers and decliners (OR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.28-1.29; P =.19). Perceived control over developing colon cancer also had a significant effect on posttest colonoscopy use (OR, 2.19; 95% CI, 1.22-3.94; P =.01). CONCLUSIONS: Genetic testing may motivate increased colonoscopic screening among HNPCC mutation carriers. Increased efforts may be needed to assess patients' family histories of colon cancer and provide appropriate referrals for genetic counseling and testing to target colonoscopic screening to high-risk individuals.

Adult↗

The role of pathology laboratories in integrating genetic testing into Australian primary care: an implementation science perspective.

As genomic testing moves into mainstream healthcare, non-genetic healthcare professionals, including general practitioners (GPs), play a critical role as gatekeepers to genetic services. Laboratories are essential in supporting this transition by providing not only high-quality genetic tests but also point-of-care tools, educational materials and clinical guidance to support their use. This study aimed to explore how these tools and supports are conceptualized, developed, implemented and evaluated and how laboratories integrate them into their relationships with GPs, an essential process for paving the way toward better use of genomics in primary care. A qualitative study design was employed using semi-structured, in-depth interviews with representatives from genetic laboratories across Australia. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) guided deductive content analysis of data. Findings spanned the four CFIR domains (Intervention Characteristics, Outer Setting, Inner Setting and Implementation Process) across 34 constructs. Participants reported that laboratories viewed point-of-care tools and resources as essential responses to persistent genomic knowledge gaps among GPs. Development of evidence-based, practice-driven and adaptable resources was supported and rewarded within laboratory organisations. A strong culture of clinical responsibility and implementation readiness, combined with robust networks and communications, enabled timely support for GPs. Gaps identified included lack of implementation planning, misalignments between laboratory-developed resources and GPs' real-world needs and inadequate mechanisms for obtaining GPs' feedback, which made evaluation problematic. By applying an implementation science framework, these findings provide insights for future efforts to build and sustain the provision of point-of-care tools and support, ultimately improving the integration of genomics in primary care.

Journal Article↗

Genetic testing and private insurance--a case of "selling one's body"?

Arguments against the possible use of genetic test results in private health and life insurance predominantly refer to the problem of certain gene carriers failing to obtain affordable insurance cover. However, some moral intuitions speaking against this practice seem to be more fundamental than mere concerns about adverse distributional effects. In their perspective, the central ethical problem is not that some people might fail to get insurance cover because of their 'bad genes', but rather that some people would manage to get insurance cover because of their 'good genes'. This paper tries to highlight the ethical background of these intuitions. Their guiding idea appears to be that, by pointing to his favourable test results, a customer might make an attempt to 'sell his body'. The rationale of this concept is developed and its applicability to the case at issue is critically investigated. The aim is to clarify an essential objection against the use of genetic information in private insurance which has not yet been openly addressed in the academic debate of the topic.

Commerce↗

Genetic testing for breast-ovarian cancer susceptibility: a regional trial.

To evaluate receptivity to testing for a genetic susceptibility to breast-ovarian cancer, information is needed on the response when the offer is open to all qualifying women in a given region. To qualify in this trial, a woman who had not had breast or ovarian cancer had to have at least two first-degree relatives or one first- and one second-degree relative with breast and/or ovarian cancer, whereas a woman who had had breast or ovarian cancer had to have at least one first-degree relative with breast or ovarian cancer and a first- or second-degree relative without cancer willing to be tested. Of 140 women qualifying and interested enough to return questionnaires requesting baseline information, 111 were referred by their physician and 29 were identified from a regional tumor registry. Of these 140, 112 came for pretest education and 98 of these chose to be tested. Thus, the acceptance rate was 70% for all those returning baseline questionnaires, but 88% for those interested enough to come for pretest education. The most common reasons for accepting testing were to take extra precautions if a mutation were found (42.9%) and to determine if offspring were at risk (24.5%). The most common reasons for declining were anxiety and absence of specific interventions. Factors predicting who chose testing were years of education (p < 0.005) and family closeness (p < 0.02). Fourteen deleterious BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations were found in 13 of the 87 families actually tested. If the criteria for testing had been three or more affected family members rather than two or more, the number of families tested would have been reduced by 46%, but the number of families found to have a deleterious mutation would have been reduced by only 9%.

Adult↗

Genetic testing in children.

In this article, the author focuses on the allocation of decision-making authority between parents and physicians. She argues that parents should have substantial room to decide whether genetic testing is good for their child and that they may appropriately consider interests in addition to those of their child in making such choices. A physician, however, may refuse to act pursuant to parental views about testing, when in the physician's view, the parents' choices would pose a risk of significant harm to the child. The balance of control between parents and physicians is illustrated by discussion of a series of case vignettes. Refusal to perform requested testing is most often warranted for testing for carrier status and for genetic predisposition to late onset disease. The author concludes her analysis by discussing why it is appropriate to give increasing deference to the views of the child as the child grows older.

Adolescent↗

Genetic Testing for Cancer Risk Assessment: A Review.

Both environmental factors and an inherited predisposition influence carcinogenesis. The direct role of inheritance in the development of cancer is evident in familial cancer syndromes. These syndromes predispose to cancer through the inheritance of a mutation in a single gene in affected carriers. While many inherited cancer syndromes are rare, an inherited predisposition is directly responsible for 5%-10% of all colon and breast cancers. Complex multigenic inheritance plays an important role in cancer predisposition for the population at large. The identification of genes responsible for an inherited predisposition to colon and breast cancer syndromes has directed public attention to genetic testing for susceptibility to cancer. Assays are currently available to determine individual susceptibility to specific cancers. Cancer genetic testing is currently a time-consuming and complex procedure which requires expertise in its application, interpretation, and follow-up strategic planning. This review discusses cancer genetics and its application to individual and family cancer risk assessment with particular emphasis on breast and colon cancer.

Journal Article↗

Reading between the lines: direct-to-consumer advertising of genetic testing in the USA.

This article critiques an advertisement in a theatre playbill by a bio-technology company for its commercial test for the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genetic mutation, which may indicate a higher risk for breast and ovarian cancer. The advertisement targets a vulnerable audience attending a play about one woman's isolated and painful death from ovarian cancer. It promotes a product with incomplete and at times incorrect information, and it misguides women by suggesting that they contact the company directly about this test, rather than encouraging them to talk to their health care providers about genetic testing and their personal risk of breast cancer. In an era in which more genetic tests will be integrated into clinical practice, we can expect an increase in direct-to-consumer marketing for such tests. This advertisement is an example of what we need to be on guard against.

Advertising↗

Why genetic testing for genes for criminality is morally required.

This paper argues for a Principle of Procreative Beneficence, that couples (or single reproducers) should select the child, of the possible children they could have, who is expected to have the best life, or at least as good a life as the others. If there are a number of different variants of a given gene, then we have most reason to select embryos which have those variants which are associated with the best lives, that is, those lives with the highest levels of well-being. It is possible that in the future some genes are identified which make it more likely that a person will engage in criminal behaviour. If that criminal behaviour makes that person's life go worse (as it plausibly would), and if those genes do not have other good effects in terms of promoting well-being, then we have a strong reason to encourage couples to test their embryos with the most favourable genetic profile. This paper was derived from a talk given as a part of the Decamp Seminar Series at the Princeton University Center for Human Values, October 4, 2000.

Beneficence↗

[Genetic tests in immune system-related diseases].

Recent progress in molecular medicine has revealed genes responsible for numerous instances of immunodeficiency syndrome. Such disorders have been diagnosed mainly by functional tests of both T and B lymphocytes. Genetic tests are effective in cases difficult to diagnose as well as in the detection of gene carriers. Currently, studies are underway to determine if SNP significantly impacts polygenic immunosystem-related diseases, and whether its effects influence disorders secondary to such diseases. In some diseases analysis of HLA aids in diagnosis.

Humans↗

Prenatal genetic testing and screening: constructing needs and reinforcing inequities.

This Article considers the influence and implications of the application of genetic technologies to definitions of disease and to the treatment of illness. The concept of "geneticization" is introduced to emphasize the dominant discourse in today's stories of health and disease and the social construction of biological phenomenon is described. The reassurance, choice and control supposedly provided by prenatal genetic testing and screening are critically examined, and their role in constructing the need for such technology is addressed. Using the stories told about prenatal diagnosis as a focus, the consequences of a genetic perspective for and on women and their health care needs are explored.

Abortion, Induced↗

Patient preferences of decision-making in the context of genetic testing for breast cancer risk.

PURPOSE: We conducted a study on women's preferred physician involvement in the decision to obtain genetic testing for breast cancer risk. METHODS: Women from a primary care physician network completed a telephone survey and a written baseline questionnaire. RESULTS: The majority preferred to make up their own minds. Predictors of leaving the decision to providers were less education, less knowledge, and higher external health locus of control. Trust in one's physician mediated the effect of health locus of control on decision method. CONCLUSION: Physicians will face requests from low-risk women and will need effective communication skills to inform women about the test.

Adult↗

Clinical application of genetic testing for deafness.

Advances in the molecular biology of hearing and deafness have identified many genes essential for normal auditory function. Allele variants of these genes cause nonsyndromic deafness, making mutation screening a valuable test to unequivocally diagnose many different forms of inherited deafness. In this study, genetic testing of GJB2, SLC26A4 and WFS1 is reviewed.

Connexin 26↗

Genetic testing: ethical implications in the workplace.

The human genome project has led to impressive scientific advances in understanding the genetic basis of disease. To date, genetic risks associated with occupational illnesses are not well understood. Recent research, however, has uncovered an allele that appears directly related to the risk of contracting chronic beryllium disease; other chromosomal abnormalities have been identified in association with cancer. Progress from the human genome project has potential implications for predicting, screening, and diagnosing occupational diseases. Ethical issues associated with the use of genetic testing in the workplace will present employers, insurers, and physicians with challenging decisions related to promoting health in the workplace while avoiding potential misuse of sensitive genetic information.

Confidentiality↗

Awareness of genetic testing for increased cancer risk in the year 2000 National Health Interview Survey.

OBJECTIVES: This study explores factors associated with differential awareness of genetic tests for increased cancer risk in the US. METHODS: 27,405 respondents from the 2000 National Health Interview Survey, ages 25+, were asked if they had heard of these tests. RESULTS: 44.4% said 'yes', including 49.9% of whites, 32.9% of African-Americans, 32.3% of American Indians/Alaskan Natives, 28.0% of Asian/Pacific Islanders, and 20.6% of Hispanics. In multivariate analysis, test awareness was significantly associated with higher education, white race, age <60 years, female gender, private health insurance, personal or parent's history of certain cancers, physical activity, and vitamin/supplement use, among other factors. CONCLUSIONS: The survey showed which population subgroups may lack access to cancer genetics information and may therefore benefit from targeted strategies to ensure risk-appropriate utilization of genetic counseling and testing.

Adult↗

Genetic testing for colorectal carcinoma susceptibility: focus group responses of individuals with colorectal carcinoma and first-degree relatives.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal carcinoma (CRC) may be the most frequent form of hereditary cancer. Genetic counseling and testing for heritable CRC is a promising approach for reducing the high incidence and mortality rates associated with the disease. Patients with CRC or those with at least one family member with the disease are the most likely persons to request or be offered genetic testing in the clinical or research setting. Currently, however, little is known about the behavioral, psychosocial, ethical, legal, and economic outcomes of CRC genetic counseling and testing. METHODS: Eight focus group interviews, four for CRC patients (n = 28) and four for first-degree relatives (n = 33), were conducted to obtain insights into attitudes, beliefs, and informational needs about genetic testing for hereditary CRC. RESULTS: Focus group interviews revealed a general lack of knowledge about cancer genetics and genetic testing; worry about confidentiality issues; strong concern for family members, particularly children; and a need for primary care providers to be informed about these issues. Major perceived advantages of genetic testing included improving health-related decisions, guiding physicians in making recommendations for surveillance, and informing relatives about risk potential. Disadvantages included potential discrimination, adverse psychologic effects, and financial costs associated with testing. CONCLUSIONS: As knowledge and media coverage of genetics continue to expand, it becomes increasingly important to continue efforts on behalf of, and in partnership with, those individuals most affected by genetic testing for hereditary cancer syndromes. These findings provide data needed to develop and implement informational, educational, counseling, and research-oriented programs that are sensitive to individuals' concerns and preferences.

Adult↗

Recommendations for quality improvement in genetic testing for cystic fibrosis. European Concerted Action on Cystic Fibrosis.

These recommendations for quality improvement of cystic fibrosis genetic diagnostic testing provide general guidelines for the molecular genetic testing of cystic fibrosis in patients/individuals. General strategies for testing as well as guidelines for laboratory procedures, internal and external quality assurance, and for reporting the results, including the requirements of minimal services in mutation testing, the nomenclature for describing mutations, procedures to control false-positive amplification reactions and to validate tests, and guidelines to implement a quality system in a molecular diagnostic laboratory are reviewed.

Accreditation↗