ReviewJCO precision oncology2020
Evaluating Web-Based Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Tests for Cancer Susceptibility.
Review in JCO precision oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Consumer Experiences and Perceptions of Genetic Counseling in Provider-Mediated Genetic Testing.Journal of genetic counseling · 2026Article
- How Has the Rise of Direct-To-Consumer Genetic Testing Impacted Genetic Counselling Practice? A Scoping Review.Clinical genetics · 2026Article
- Predictive Biomarkers for Asymptomatic Adults: Opportunities, Risks, and Guidance for General Practice.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Pediatric DTC Genetic Testing for Adult-Onset Inherited Cancer Risk: The Perspectives of High-Risk Parents.Public health genomics · 2025Article
- Awareness, use, motivations and methods of accessing genetic testing in 2022 in the United States.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Test-takers' perspectives on consumer genetic testing for hereditary cancer risk.Frontiers in genetics · 2024Article
- Retrospective Cohort Study on the Limitations of Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Screening in Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer.JCO precision oncology · 2023Article
- Genetic testing-whether to allow complete freedom? Direct to consumer tests versus genetic tests for medical purposes.Journal of applied genetics · 2022Review
- BRCA1/2 testing for genetic susceptibility to cancer after 25 years: A scoping review and a primer on ethical implications.Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) · 2022Article
- The Role of Genetic Testing for Parkinson's Disease.Current neurology and neuroscience reports · 2021Review
- Strategies to Improve the Clinical Outcomes for Direct-to-Consumer Pharmacogenomic Tests.Genes · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeRecent years have seen direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing for cancer susceptibility change dramatically. For one, a new model now dominates the market where tests are advertised to consumers but ordered by physicians. For another, many of today's tests are distinguished from earlier DTC offerings for cancer susceptibility by their scope and potential clinical significance. This review provides a comprehensive overview of available DTC genetic tests for cancer susceptibility and identifies aspects of the DTC testing process that could affect consumers' ability to make informed decisions about testing and understand their results.
methodsFirst, we provide an overview of each DTC genetic test for cancer susceptibility that includes information about cost; who orders it; whether variants of uncertain significance are returned; availability of genetic counseling; intended users; management of variant reclassifications; whether it is characterized as diagnostic, actionable, and clinically valid; molecular technique used; and Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments/College of American Pathologists status. Second, we identify six aspects of the testing process that could affect consumers' ability to make informed decisions about testing and interpret their results: How companies use certain terms (eg, medical grade or clinical grade); how companies use consumers' health information during the ordering process; the extent of genetic counseling provided by companies; companies' procedures for returning results; the role of company-provided ordering physicians; and companies' procedures for communicating variant reclassifications.
resultsOn the basis of our review of companies' Web sites, we believe that consumers would benefit from more information about these aspects of testing.
conclusionProviding this information would help consumers make informed decisions about whether to use a particular DTC genetic testing service and, should they choose to pursue testing, understand the implications and limitations of their results.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.