Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26468061›Full record

ArticleBMC medical genomics2015

The impact of direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing on perceived risk of breast, prostate, colorectal, and lung cancer: findings from the PGen study.

Deanna Alexis Carere, Tyler VanderWeele, Tanya A Moreno, Joanna L Mountain, J Scott Roberts, Peter Kraft, Robert C Green, PGen Study Group

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical genomics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Cascading After Peridiagnostic Cancer Genetic Testing: An Alternative to Population-Based Screening.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2020
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Personal Genomic Testing for Cancer Risk: Results From the Impact of Personal Genomics Study.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2017
    Article
  11. An eMERGE Clinical Center at Partners Personalized Medicine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Deanna Alexis CarereDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. dmc875@mail.harvard.edu.
Tyler VanderWeeleDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. tvanderw@hsph.harvard.edu.
Tanya A MorenoPathway Genomics, San Diego, CA, USA. tamoreno@gmail.com.
Joanna L Mountain23andMe Inc., Mountain View, CA, USA. joanna@23andme.com.
J Scott RobertsDepartment of Health Behavior and Health Education, University of Michigan School of Public Health, Ann Arbor, MI, USA. jscottr@umich.edu.
Peter KraftDepartment of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA. pkraft@hsph.harvard.edu.
Robert C GreenDivision of Genetics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, EC Alumnae Building, Suite 301, 41 Avenue Louis Pasteur, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. rcgreen@genetics.med.harvard.edu.
PGen Study Group
Brigham and Women's Hospital · USHarvard University · US23andMe (United States) · USUniversity of Michigan · US

Funding

Integration of Whole Genome Sequencing into Clinical MedicineU01HG006500 · NHGRI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI GREEN, ROBERT C. · 2012 to 2016
$11.5M
Statistical Methods for Analysis of Massive Genetic and Genomic Data in Cancer ResearchR35CA197449 · NCI · HARVARD UNIVERSITY D/B/A HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI XIHONG LIN · 2015 to 2026
$10.9M
Risk Evaluation and Education for Alzheimer's Disease (REVEAL IV)R01HG002213 · NHGRI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI GREEN, ROBERT C. · 1999 to 2012
$7.6M
Statistical Methods for the Spatio-Temporal Assessment of Social Disparities in CancerP01CA134294 · NCI · HARVARD SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH · PI HANEUSE, SEBASTIEN, HERNAN, MIGUEL · 2008 to 2017
$6.8M
Genome Sequence-Based Screening for Childhood Risk and Newborn IllnessU19HD077671 · NICHD · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI BEGGS, ALAN H., GREEN, ROBERT C. · 2013 to 2018
$6.1M
Impact of Direct to Consumer Genetic TestingR01HG005092 · NHGRI · BRIGHAM AND WOMEN'S HOSPITAL · PI GREEN, ROBERT C., ROBERTS, SCOTT · 2010 to 2012
$1.1M
CIHRNCI NIH HHS P01 CA134294NCI NIH HHS R35 CA197449NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG002213NHGRI NIH HHS R01-HG002213NHGRI NIH HHS R01 HG005092NHGRI NIH HHS R01-HG005092NHGRI NIH HHS U01 HG006500NHGRI NIH HHS U01-HG006500NICHD NIH HHS U19 HD077671NICHD NIH HHS U19-HD077671
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDirect access to genomic information has the potential to transform cancer risk counseling. We measured the impact of direct-to-consumer genomic risk information on changes to perceived risk (ΔPR) of breast, prostate, colorectal and lung cancer among personal genomic testing (PGT) customers. We hypothesized that ΔPR would reflect directionality of risk estimates, attenuate with time, and be modified by participant characteristics.

methodsPathway Genomics and 23andMe customers were surveyed prior to receiving PGT results, and 2 weeks and 6 months post-results. For each cancer, PR was measured on a 5-point ordinal scale from "much lower than average" to "much higher than average." PGT results, based on genotyping of common genetic variants, were dichotomized as elevated or average risk. The relationship between risk estimate and ΔPR was evaluated with linear regression; generalized estimating equations modeled this relationship over time.

resultsWith the exception of lung cancer (for which ΔPR was positive regardless of result), elevated risk results were significantly associated with positive ΔPR, and average risk results with negative ΔPR (e.g., prostate cancer, 2 weeks: least squares-adjusted ΔPR = 0.77 for elevated risk versus -0.21 for average risk; p-valuedifference < 0.0001) among 1154 participants. Large changes were rare: for each cancer, <4 % of participants overall reported a ΔPR of ±3 or more units. Effect modification by age, cancer family history, and baseline interest was observed for breast, colorectal, and lung cancer, respectively. A pattern of decreasing impact on ΔPR over time was consistently observed, but this trend was significant only in the case of colorectal cancer.

conclusionsWe have quantified the effect on consumer risk perception of returning genetic-based cancer risk information directly to consumers without clinician mediation. Provided via PGT, this information has a measurable but modest effect on perceived cancer risk, and one that is in some cases modified by consumers' non-genetic risk context. Our observations of modest marginal effect sizes, infrequent extreme changes in perceived risk, and a pattern of diminishing impact with time, suggest that the ability of PGT to effect changes to cancer screening and prevention behaviors may be limited by relatively small changes to perceived risk.

Indexed as

Genetic TestingGenomicsPerceptionAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBreast NeoplasmsColorectal NeoplasmsDirect-To-Consumer Screening and TestingFemaleGenetic Predisposition to DiseaseHumansLung NeoplasmsMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasms

Identifiers

PMID26468061
PMCPMC4606558
OpenAlexW2162069507

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.