Journal of Community Genetics最新文献

Given the potentially large ethical and societal implications of human germline gene editing (HGGE) the urgent need for public and stakeholder engagement (PSE) has been repeatedly expressed. However, the explicit goals of such PSE efforts often remain poorly defined. In this program report, we outline the goals of our Dutch project called De DNA dialogen (The DNA dialogues). We believe that setting explicit goals in advance is essential to enable meaningful PSE efforts. Moreover, it enables the evaluation of our engagement efforts. The following four goals, which result from intensive consultations among the transdisciplinary projects' consortium members and based on the literature, form the foundation for how we will engage the public and stakeholders in deliberation about HGGE: 1) Enable publics and stakeholders to deliberate on "what if" questions, before considering "whether" and "how" questions regarding HGGE, 2) Investigate agreement and disagreement in values and beliefs regarding HGGE in order to agree and disagree more precisely, 3) Involve diverse publics with various perspectives, with a focus on those that are typically underrepresented in PSE, 4) Enable societally aligned policy making by providing policymakers, health care professionals and legal experts insight into how values are weighed and ascribed meaning in the context of HGGE by various publics, and how these values relate to the principles of democratic rule of law and fundamental rights. The effort to describe our goals in detail may serve as an example and can inform future initiatives striving for open science and open governance in the context of PSE.

Up to 25% of pediatric cataract cases are inherited. There is sparse information in the literature regarding the cost of whole-exome sequencing (WES) for suspected hereditary pediatric cataracts. Molecular diagnosis of suspected hereditary pediatric cataracts is important for comprehensive genetic counseling. We performed a partial economic evaluation with a mixed costing analysis, using reimbursement data and microcosting approach with a bottom-up technique to estimate the cost of using WES for genetic diagnosis of suspected hereditary pediatric cataracts from the perspective of the Brazilian governmental health care system. One hundred and ten participants from twenty-nine families in Rio de Janeiro (RJ) were included. Costs of consumables, staff and equipment were calculated. Two scenarios were created: (1) The reference scenario included patients from RJ with suspected hereditary pediatric cataracts plus two family members. (2) The alternative scenario considered other genetic diseases, resulting in 5,280 exams per month. Sensitivity analysis was also performed. In the reference scenario, the total cost per exam was 700.09 United States dollars (USD), and in the alternative scenario, the total cost was 559.23 USD. The cost of WES alone was 527.85 USD in the reference scenario and 386.98 USD in the alternative scenario. Sensitivity analysis revealed that the largest costs were associated with consumables in both scenarios. Economic evaluations can help inform policy decisions, especially in middle-income countries such as Brazil.

Tumor genomic profiling (TGP) examines genes and somatic mutations specific to a patient's tumor to identify targets for cancer treatments but can also uncover secondary hereditary (germline) mutations. Most patients are unprepared to make complex decisions related to this information. Black/African American (AA) cancer patients are especially at risk because of lower health literacy, higher levels of medical mistrust, and lower awareness and knowledge of genetic testing. But little is known about their TGP attitudes or preferences. Five in-person focus groups were conducted with Black/AA cancer patients (N = 33) from an NCI-designated cancer center and an affiliated oncology unit in an urban safety-net hospital located in Philadelphia. Focus groups explored participants' understanding of TGP, cultural beliefs about genetics, medical mistrust, and how these perceptions informed decision-making. Participants were mostly female (81.8%), and one-third had some college education; mean age was 57 with a SD of 11.35. Of patients, 33.3% reported never having heard of TGP, and 48.5% were not aware of having had TGP as part of their cancer treatment. Qualitative analysis was guided by the principles of applied thematic analysis and yielded five themes: (1) mistrust of medical institutions spurring independent health-information seeking; (2) genetic testing results as both empowering and overwhelming; (3) how provider-patient communication can obviate medical mistrust; (4) how unsupportive patient-family communication undermines interest in secondary-hereditary risk communication; and (5) importance of developing centralized patient support systems outside of treatment decisions. Results improve understanding of how Black/AA patients perceive of TGP and how interventions can be developed to assist with making informed decisions about secondary hereditary results.

Within the numerous policy and governance recommendations for human genome editing research, anticipatory public engagement seems universally agreed upon as a vital endeavor. Yet it is unclear whether and how scientists whose research involves genome editing see value in engaging the public in discussions of genome editing research governance. To address this question, we interviewed 81 international scientists who use genome editing in their research. The views of our scientist interviewees about public engagement occupied a broad spectrum from enthusiastic support to strong skepticism. But most scientists' views landed somewhere in the middle, seeing public engagement as merely informing the public about the science of genome editing. We argue that such a stance reflects the traditional "knowledge-deficit model." Beyond addressing the operational difficulties of public engagement, many scientists' adherence to the deficit model is a deeper barrier that needs to be addressed if public engagement is to occur and be successful.

Primary Health Care (PHC) is the gateway for patients in the Brazilian unified health system (Sistema Único de Saúde-SUS), playing an extremely important role in the identification of potential patients with genetic diseases, and referral to specialized and tertiary health services. The PHC is composed of a multidisciplinary team, including the Community Health Agent, who is in direct contact with the community. To implement an educational program aimed at community health agents working in several municipalities in the state of Rio Grande do Sul (RS), Brazil. The training was focused on genetic diseases in general, with a special focus on identifying patients with Mucopolysaccharidosis (MPS). Tests were applied before and after the educational intervention, in order to assess the participants' knowledge on the topic at these two moments. The study covered a total of ten training sessions carried out in eight municipalities in the RS state, training 374 community health agents. The number of correct answers in the pre-test (n = 339) was 8,4 (SD 1.2), while in the post-test (n = 361) it was 9,2 (SD 0.8). Statistical analysis showed that the educational intervention effectively provided information about genetic diseases to the participants. Considering that community health agents are of fundamental importance in the identification and prevention of diseases and in the better navigation of the patients on the SUS, these professionals play a key role in the field of rare genetic diseases, and continuous training strategies should be taken.

The APOE-ε4 allele(s) is a strong risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD). A significant point of access for this allele testing is through services provided by medical facilities in Japan, which advertise out-of-insurance APOE testing on their websites. There is a concern that website advertisements for APOE testing may influence the ability for individuals to adequately self-determine whether to undergo APOE testing. We conducted a cross-sectional survey on medical facility websites in Japan advertising APOE genetic testing. We predefined desirable features for advertisement descriptions based on legal regulations and guidelines published by relevant professional societies and evaluated each website according to these features. We identified 220 medical facilities that had posted advertisements on their websites for the provision of APOE genetic testing, of which 85% were small clinics. Contact information, details, and costs of testing were described in most of the websites. Meanwhile, features such as "explaining APOE as a risk gene," "notes on interpreting APOE results," or "explaining examination methods" (e.g., blood sampling) were described to a variable degree depending on individual facilities. "Notes on genetic testing" or "referring to genetic counseling" were hardly referred to, and specialists with appropriate expertise were considered to participate in clinical practice in approximately one-third of these facilities providing APOE testing services. These website evaluation results showed moderate to substantial reliability between independent raters. These results suggest that self-determination of pursuing out-of-insurance APOE testing at some medical facilities in Japan may possibly be influenced in an inappropriate manner, at least in its entry route of taking the test.

Clinical chatbots are increasingly used to help integrate genetic testing into clinical contexts, but no chatbot exists for Apolipoprotein L1 (APOL1) genetic testing of living kidney donor (LKD) candidates of African ancestry. Our study aimed to culturally adapt and assess perceptions of the Gia® chatbot to help integrate APOL1 testing into LKD evaluation. Ten focus groups and post-focus group surveys were conducted with 54 LKDs, community members, and kidney transplant recipients of African ancestry. Data were analyzed through thematic analysis and descriptive statistics. Key themes about making Gia culturally targeted included ensuring: (1) transparency by providing Black LKDs' testimonials, explaining patient privacy and confidentiality protections, and explaining how genetic testing can help LKD evaluation; (2) content is informative by educating Black LKDs about APOL1 testing instead of aiming to convince them to undergo testing, presenting statistics, and describing how genetic discrimination is legally prevented; and (3) content avoids stigma about living donation in the Black community. Most agreed Gia was neutral and unbiased (82%), trustworthy (82%), and words, phrases, and expressions were familiar to the intended audience (85%). Our culturally adapted APOL1 Gia chatbot was well regarded. Future research should assess how this chatbot could supplement provider discussion prior to genetic testing to scale APOL1 counseling and testing for LKD candidate clinical evaluation.