The impact of risk information exposure on women's beliefs about direct-to-consumer genetic testing for BRCA mutations

Clinical Genetics

Volumn 81, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 29-37

  Gray, S W ^a,b   Hornik, R C ^c   Schwartz, J S ^d,e   Armstrong, K ^d,f  

^a DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

BRCA; Cancer; Communication; Direct to consumer; Informed consent

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BREAST CANCER; FAMILY HISTORY; FEMALE; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC SCREENING; HEALTH BEHAVIOR; HEALTH BELIEF; HUMAN; MEDICAL INFORMATION; ONCOGENE; OVARY CANCER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; BRCA1 PROTEIN; BRCA2 PROTEIN; CONSUMER PARTICIPATION; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; GENETIC COUNSELING; GENETIC PREDISPOSITION TO DISEASE; GENETIC TESTING; HEALTH KNOWLEDGE, ATTITUDES, PRACTICE; HEREDITARY BREAST AND OVARIAN CANCER SYNDROME; HUMANS; INTERNET; INTERVIEWS AS TOPIC; MIDDLE AGED; MUTATION; RISK; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 83355163240     PISSN: 00099163     EISSN: 13990004     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0004.2011.01797.x     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Genetics and Public Policy Center. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing companies 2010, from. Accessed on October 26, 2011.
2. Gollust SE, Wilfond BS, Hull SC. Direct-to-consumer sales of genetic services on the Internet. Genet Med 2003: 5 (4): 332-337.
3. Hamilton A. 50 Best inventions 2008: the retail DNA test. Time, October 27, 2008.
4. Schickedanz AD, Herdman RC. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: the need to get retail genomics right. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009: 86 (1): 17-20.
5. McGuire AL, Diaz CM, Wang T et al. Social networkers' attitudes toward direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Am J Bioeth 2009: 9 (6-7): 3-10.
6. Stein R. Company Plans to Sell Genetic Testing Kit at Drugstores. The Washington Post, May 11, 2010.
7. Corbett Dooren J. House panel probes gene tests. The Wall Street J, May 20, 2010.
8. Williams-Jones B. Where there's a web, there's a way: commercial genetic testing and the Internet. Community Genet 2003: 6 (1): 46-57.
9. Wolfberg AJ. Genes on the Web-direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic testing. N Engl J Med 2006: 355 (6): 543-545.
10. Javitt GH, Stanley E, Hudson K. Direct-to-consumer genetic tests, government oversight, and the First Amendment: what the government can (and can't) do to protect the public's health. Oklahoma Law Rev 2004: 57 (2): 251-302.
11. Siegel R, Palca J. DNA: the machinery behind human beings - part 1. national public radio. All things consideredfrom. Accessed on October 10, 2005.
12. Marietta C, McGuire AL. Currents in contemporary ethics. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: is it the practice of medicine? J Law Med Ethics 2009: 37 (2): 369-374.
13. Altman RB. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: failure is not an option. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2009: 86 (1): 15-17.
14. Kontos EZ, Viswanath K. Cancer-related direct-to-consumer advertising: a critical review. Nature reviews. Cancer 2011: 11: 142-50.
15. Hunter DJ, Khoury MJ, Drazen JM. Letting the genome out of the bottle-will we get our wish? N Engl J Med 2008: 358 (2): 105-107.
16. McCabe LL, McCabe ER. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: access and marketing. Genet Med 2004: 6 (1): 58-59.
17. Mykitiuk R. Caveat emptor: direct-to-consumer supply and advertising of genetic testing. Clin Invest Med 2004: 27 (1): 23-32.
18. Gray S, Olopade OI. Direct-to-consumer marketing of genetic tests for cancer: buyer beware. J Clin Oncol 2003: 21 (17): 3191-3193.
19. Caulfield T, Ries NM, Ray PN et al. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: good, bad or benign? Clinical genetics 2010: 77: 101-105.
20. Javitt GH. Policy implications of genetic testing: not just for geneticists anymore. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 2006: 13 (2): 178-182.
21. Hudson K, Javitt G, Burke W et al. ASHG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing in the United States. Obstet Gynecol 2007: 110 (6): 1392-1395.
22. McGuire A, Evans B, Caulfield T et al. Regulating direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Science 2010: 330: 181-182.
23. Robson ME, Storm CD, Weitzel J et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic and genomic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol 2010: 28 (5): 893-901.
24. ACMG. ACMG statement on direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Genet Med 2004: 6 (1): 60.
25. Groff K. American Medical Association adopts new direct-to-consumer genetic testing policy recommendations. Medical News Today, August 14, 2008.
26. ESHG. Statement of the ESHG on direct-to-consumer genetic testing for health-related purposes. Eur J Hum Genet 2010: 18: 1271-1273.
27. US Government Accountability Office. Direct-to-consumer genetic tests: misleading test results are further complicated by deceptive marketing and other questionable practices. Washington, D.C.: US Government Accountability Office, 2010.
28. Kuehn BM. Inconsistent results, inaccurate claims plague direct-to-consumer gene tests. JAMA 2010: 304: 1313-5.
29. Pollack A. Gene testing questioned by regulators. The New York Times June 26, 2008.
30. Fraker M, Mazza A-M. National Research Council and Institute of Medicine; Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: Summary of a Workshop. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2010.
31. Rubin R. FDA groups genetic tests with medical devices, requiring approval. USA Today.com 2010, from. Accessed on June 22, 2010.
32. Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act of 2010, H.R. 5440, 111th Cong, 2d Sess. 2010.
33. Gray SW, O'Grady C, Karp L et al. Risk information exposure and direct-to-consumer genetic testing for BRCA mutations among women with a personal or family history of breast or ovarian cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009: 18 (4): 1303-11.
34. Petty RE, Cacioppo JT. The Elaboration LIkelihood Model Of Persuasion, in Advances in experimental social psychology. New York: Academic Press, 1986: 123-205.
35. Petty RE, Wegener DT. The elaboration likelihood model: current status and controversies. In: Chaiken S, Trope Y, eds. Dual-process Theories in Social Psychology. New York: The Guilford Press, 1999: 41-72.
36. Brinol P, Richard EP. Fundamental processes leading to attitude change: implications for cancer prevention communications. J Commun 2006: 56: S81-S104.
37. Pornpitakpan C. The persuasiveness of source credibility: a critical review of five decades' evidence. J Appl Soc Psychol 2004: 34 (2): 243-281.
38. Epstein R, Teagarden JR. Comparative effectiveness and personalized medicine: evolving together or apart? Health affairs (Project Hope) 2010: 29: 1783-1787.
39. Frank TS, Deffenbaugh AM, Reid JE et al. Clinical characteristics of individuals with germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2: analysis of 10, 000 individuals. J Clin Oncol 2002: 20 (6): 1480-1490.
40. Sweeny K, Legg AM. Predictors of interest in direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Psychol Health 2011: 1-14.
41. Kinmonth AL, Reinhard J, Bobrow M et al. The new genetics. Implications for clinical services in Britain and the United States. BMJ 1998: 316 (7133): 767-770.
42. Watson EK, Shickle D, Qureshi N et al. The 'new genetics' and primary care: GPs' views on their role and their educational needs. Fam Pract 1999: 16 (4): 420-425.
43. Hayflick SJ, Eiff MP. Role of primary care providers in the delivery of genetics services. Community Genet 1998: 1 (1): 18-22.
44. SACGHS. Genetics education and training of health care professionals, public health providers, and consumers. O. o. S. Policy, 2010.
45. Ford D, Easton DF, Peto J. Estimates of the gene frequency of BRCA1 and its contribution to breast and ovarian cancer incidence. Am J Hum Genet 1995: 57 (6): 1457-1462.
46. Khoury MJ, Wagener DK. Epidemiological evaluation of the use of genetics to improve the predictive value of disease risk factors. Am J Hum Genet 1995: 56 (4): 835-844.
47. Kohane IS, Masys DR, Altman RB. The incidentalome: a threat to genomic medicine. JAMA 2006: 296 (2): 212-215.
48. Risch HA, McLaughlin JR, Cole DEC et al. Population BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation frequencies and cancer penetrances: a kin-cohort study in Ontario, Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006: 98 (23): 1694-1706.
49. American Society of Clinical Oncology. American Society of Clinical Oncology policy statement update: genetic testing for cancer susceptibility. J Clin Oncol 2003: 21 (12): 2397-2406.
50. Diaz JA, Griffith RA, Ng JJ et al. Patients' use of the Internet for medical information. J Gen Intern Med 2002: 17 (3): 180-185.
51. Goddard KA, Robitaille J, Dowling NF et al. Health-related direct-to-consumer genetic tests: a public health assessment and analysis of practices related to Internet-based tests for risk of thrombosis. Public Health Genomics 2009: 12 (2): 92-104.
52. Lachance CR, Erby LAH, Ford BM et al. Informational content, literacy demands, and usability of websites offering health-related genetic tests directly to consumers. Genet Med 2010: 12 (5): 304-312.
53. Leighton JW, Valvered K, Bernhardt B. The general public's understanding and perception of direct-to-consumer genetic test results., in The American Society of Human Genetics Meeting. Washington, D.C: The American Society of Human Genetics, 2010.
54. Bloss CS, Schork NJ, Topol EJ. Effect of direct-to-consumer genomewide profiling to assess disease risk. New Engl J Med 2011: 364 (6): 524-534.
55. McBride CM, Wade CH, Kaphingst KA. Consumers' views of direct-to-consumer genetic information. Annu Rev Genom Hum Genet 2010: 11: 427-446.
56. Gordon ES, Stack CB, Gharani T et al. Perceived risk, anxiety and sharing behavior in response to personalized risk information in a cohort study, in American Society of Human Genetics Meeting. Washington, D.C.: The American Society of Human Genetics, 2010.
57. Kaufman D, Murphy-Bollinger J, Devaney S et al. Direct from consumers: a survey of 1, 048 customers of three direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing companies about motivations, attitudes, and responses to testing., in American Society of Human Genetics Meeting. Washington, D.C: The American Society of Human Genetics, 2010.
58. Feero WG, Guttmacher AE, Collins FS. Genomic medicine-an updated primer. N Engl J Med 2010: 362 (21): 2001-2011.