A critical view of the general public's awareness and physicians' opinion of the trends and potential pitfalls of genetic testing in Greece

Personalized Medicine

Volumn 8, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 551-561

  Mai, Yuan ^a   Koromila, Theodora ^b   Sagia, Aggeliki ^a   Cooper, David N ^c   Vlachopoulos, Georgios ^d   Lagoumintzis, George ^e   Kollia, Panagoula ^b   Poulas, Konstantinos ^a   Stathakopoulos, Vlassios ^f   Patrinos, George P ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PATRAS   (Greece)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

^c CARDIFF UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PATRAS   (Greece)

^e TECHNOLOGICAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE OF PATRAS   (Greece)

^f ATHENS UNIVERSITY OF ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS   (Greece)

Author keywords

education; general public awareness; genetic testing; healthcare; insurance cost; molecular genetics; pharmacogenomics; physicians' opinion; reimbursement

Indexed keywords

DNA;

ACCESS TO INFORMATION; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL PRACTICE; FEMALE; GENETIC DISORDER; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION; GENETIC SCREENING; GREECE; HEALTH CARE COST; HEALTH INSURANCE; HUMAN; MALE; MOLECULAR GENETICS; PHARMACOGENOMICS; PHYSICIAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE; PUBLIC OPINION; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW;

EID: 79960967702     PISSN: 17410541     EISSN: 1744828X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/pme.11.48     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Chen JM, Férec C, Cooper DN. Revealing the human mutome. Clin. Genet. 78(4 310-320 (2010).
2. Cooper DN, Chen JM, Ball EV et al. Genes, mutations, and human inherited disease at the dawn of the age of personalized genomics. Hum. Mutat. 31(6 631-655 (2010).
3. Guttmacher AE, McGuire AL, Ponder B, Stefánsson K. Personalized genomic information: preparing for the future of genetic medicine. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11(2 161-165 (2010).
4. Ginsburg GS, Willard HF. Genomic and personalized medicine: foundations and applications. Transl. Res. 154(6 277-287 (2009).
5. Sagia A, Cooper DN, Poulas K, Stathakopoulos V, Patrinos GP. A critical appraisal of the private genetic and pharmacogenomic testing environment in Greece. Pers. Med. 8(4 413-420 (2011).
6. Hogarth S, Javitt G, Melzer D. The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: legal, ethical, and policy issues. Annu. Rev. Genomics Hum. Genet. 9, 161-182 (2008).
7. Metzker ML. Sequencing technologies - the next generation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11(1 31-46 (2010).
8. Grimaldi KA, Look MP, Scioli GA, Clavero JC, Marinos S, Tagaris T. Personal genetics: regulatory framework in Europe from a service provider's perspective. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 19(4 382-388 (2011).
9. Hietala M, Hakonen A, Aro AR, Niemelä P, Peltonen L, Aula P. Attitudes toward genetic testing among the general population and relatives of patients with a severe genetic disease: a survey from Finland. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 56(6 1493-1500 (1995).
10. Balck F, Berth H, Meyer W. Attitudes toward genetic testing in a German population. Genet. Test. Mol. Biomarkers 13(6 743-750 (2009).
11. Makeeva OA, Markova VV, Roses AD, Puzyrev VP. An epidemiologic-based survey of public attitudes towards predictive genetic testing in Russia. Pers. Med. 7(3 291-300 (2010).
12. Fargher EA, Tricker K, Newman W et al. Current use of pharmacogenetic testing: a national survey of thiopurine methyltransferase testing prior to azathioprine prescription. J. Clin. Pharm. Ther. 32(2 187-195 (2007). (Pubitemid 46449703)
13. Fargher EA, Eddy C, Newman W et al. Patients' and healthcare professionals' views on pharmacogenetic testing and its future delivery in the NHS. Pharmacogenomics 8(11 1511-1519 (2007). (Pubitemid 350286396)
14. Ries NM, Hyde-Lay R, Caulfield T. Willingness to pay for genetic testing: a study of attitudes in a Canadian population. Pub. Health Genomics 13(5 292-300 (2010).
15. Caulfield T, Ries NM, Ray PN, Shuman C, Wilson B. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: good, bad or benign? Clin. Genet. 77(2 101-105 (2010).
16. Khoury MJ, Coates RJ, Evans JP. Evidence-based classification of recommendations on use of genomic tests in clinical practice: dealing with insufficient evidence. Genet. Med. 12(11) 680-683 (2010).
17. van El CG, Cornel MC. Genetic testing and common disorders in a public health framework. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 19(4 377-381 (2011).
18. Cherkas LF, Harris JM, Levinson E, Spector TD, Prainsack B. A survey of UK public interest in internet-based personal genome testing. PLoS ONE 5(10 e13473 (2010).
19. Goddard KA, Duquette D, Zlot A et al. Public awareness and use of direct-to-consumer genetic tests: results from 3 state population-based surveys, 2006 Am. J. Pub. Health 99(3 442-445 (2009).
20. Bloss CS, Ornowski L, Silver E et al. Consumer perceptions of direct-to-consumer personalized genomic risk assessments. Genet. Med. 12(9556-566 (2010).
21. Kricka LJ, Fortina P, Mai Y, Patrinos GP. Direct-access genetic testing: the view from Europe. Nat. Rev. Genet. (2011) (In Press).