Journal of Genetic Counseling

, Volume 21, Issue 3, pp 374–381

Genetic Testing Integration Panels (GTIPs): A Novel Approach for Considering Integration of Direct-To-Consumer and Other New Genetic Tests into Patient Care

Professional Issues

Abstract

There has been a dramatic increase in the number of genetic tests available but few tests have practice guidelines. In addition, many tests have become available outside of clinical settings through direct-to-consumer (DTC) companies and several offer tests not considered standard of care. To address several practical challenges associated with the rapid introduction of clinical and DTC genetic tests, we propose that genetic counselors and geneticists organize expert panels in their institutions to discuss the integration of new tests into patient care. We propose the establishment of Genetic Testing Integration Panels (GTIPs) to bring together local experts in medical genetics, genetic counseling, bioethics and law, health communication and clinical laboratory genetics. We describe key features of this approach and consider some of the potential advantages and limitations of using a GTIP to address the many clinical challenges raised by rapidly emerging clinical and DTC genetic tests.

Keywords

Genetic testing Direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing Genetic tests Genetic Testing Integration Panels (GTIPs) Ethical issues Whole genome sequencing Multiplex tests 

References

  1. American College of Medical Genetics (2008). ACMG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Available from: http://www.acmg.net/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Policy_Statements&Template=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=2975. Accessed July 1, 2010.
  2. American College of Medical Genetics (2011a). Disease/phenotype-specific standards and guidelines. Available from: http://www.acmg.net/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Laboratory_Standards_and_Guidelines&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=6439. Accessed July 1, 2011.
  3. American College of Medical Genetics (2011b). Practice guidelines. Available from: http://www.acmg.net/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Practice_Guidelines&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=6518. Accessed July 1, 2011.
  4. American College of Medical Genetics (2011c). Policy statements. Available from: http://www.acmg.net/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Policy_Statements&Template=/CM/HTMLDisplay.cfm&ContentID=6042. Accessed July 1, 2011.
  5. American Society of Human Genetics (2007). ASHG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the United States. American Journal of Human Genetics 81, 635–637. Available from: http://www.ashg.org/pdf/dtc_statement.pdf. Accessed July 1, 2011.Google Scholar
  6. Eng, C., Sharp, R. R. (2010). Bioethical and clinical dilemmas of direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing: the problem of misattributed equivalence. Science Translational Medicine, 2(17), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Initiative (2011a). Evidence Reports. Available from: http://www.egappreviews.org/workingrp/reports.htm. Accessed October 2, 2011.
  8. Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Initiative (2011b). Recommendations. Available from: http://www.egappreviews.org/recommendations/index.htm. Accessed October 2, 2011.
  9. Faucett, W. A., & Ward, P. A. (2009). Understanding genetic testing. In W. R. Uhlmann, J. L. Schuette, B. M. Yashar (Eds.), A guide to genetic counseling (2nd ed., pp. 283–311). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  10. GeneTests: Medical Genetics Information Resource (1993–2010). Copyright, University of Washington, Seattle. 1993–2010. Available from: http://www.genetests.org. Accessed June 30, 2011.Growth of laboratory directory. Available from:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/projects/GeneTests/static/whatsnew/labdirgrowth.shtml.Accessed June 30, 2011.
  11. Genetics and Public Policy Center (2010). DTC Genetic Testing Companies. Available from: http://www.dnapolicy.org/resources/AlphabetizedDTCGeneticTestingCompanies.pdf. Accessed June 30, 2011.
  12. Giovanni, M. A., Fickie, M. R., Lehmann, L. S., Green, R. C., Meckley, L. M., Veenstra D., et al. (2010). Health-care referrals from direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Genetic Testing and Molecular Biomarkers 14(6), 817–819.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hock, K. T., Christensen, K. D., Yashar, B. M., Roberts, J. S., Gollust, S. E., & Uhlmann, W. R. (2011). Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: an assessment of genetic counselors’ knowledge and beliefs. Genetics in Medicine, 13(4), 325–332.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. National Society of Genetic Counselors (2007). Position statements. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Available from: http://www.nsgc.org/Media/PositionStatements/tabid/330/Default.aspx. Accessed July 1, 2011.
  15. National Society of Genetic Counselors (2011a). Practice guidelines. Available from: http://www.nsgc.org/Publications/PracticeGuidelines/tabid/313/Default.aspx. Accessed July 1, 2011.
  16. National Society of Genetic Counselors (2011b). Position statements. Available from: http://www.nsgc.org/Media/PositionStatements/tabid/330/Default.aspx. Accessed July 1, 2011.
  17. Ng, P. C., Murray, S. S., Levy, S., & Venter, J. C. (2009). An agenda for personalized medicine. Nature, 461(7265), 724–726.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Powell, K. P., Cogswell, W. A., Christianson, C. A., Dave, G., Verma, A., Eubanks, S., et al. (2011). Primary care physicians’ awareness, experience and opinions of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Journal of Genetic Counseling. Epub ahead of print July 16.Google Scholar
  19. Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Genetic Testing (2011) Documents. Available from: http://oba.od.nih.gov/SACGHS/sacgt_documents.html#GT_DOC007. Accessed October 2, 2011.
  20. Secretary’s Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health and Society (2011) Archives. Available from: http://oba.od.nih.gov/SACGHS/sacghs_home.html. Accessed October 2, 2011.
  21. Sharp, R. R. (2011). Downsizing genomic medicine: approaching the ethical complexity of whole-genome sequencing by starting small. Genetics in Medicine, 13(3), 191–194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Teutsch, S. M., Bradley, L. A., Palomaki, G. E., Haddow, J. E., Piper, M., Calonge, N., Dotson, W. D., Douglas, M. P., Berg, A. O., & EGAPP Working Group. (2009). The evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) initiative: methods of the EGAPP working group. Genetics in Medicine, 11(1), 3–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Uhlmann, W. R. (2009). Thinking it all through: Case preparation and management. In W. R. Uhlmann, J. L. Schuette, & B. M. Yashar (Eds.), A guide to genetic counseling (2nd ed., pp. 93–131). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  24. United States Government Accountability Office (2010). Direct-to-consumer genetic tests: Misleading test results are further complicated by deceptive marketing and other questionable practices. Testimony before the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, Committee on Energy and Commerce, House of Representatives. Statement of Gregory Kunz, Managing Director Forensic Audits and Special Investigations. GAO-10-847T, 1–29. Available from: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d10847t.pdf. Accessed July 1, 2011.

Copyright information

© National Society of Genetic Counselors, Inc. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Molecular Medicine and GeneticsUniversity of Michigan Health SystemAnn ArborUSA
  2. 2.Department of Human GeneticsUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  3. 3.Center for Ethics, Humanities and Spiritual Care, Department of Bioethics and Genomic Medicine InstituteThe Cleveland ClinicClevelandUSA
  4. 4.Center for Genetic Research Ethics and LawCase Western Reserve UniversityClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations