Are commercial genetic injury tests premature?

Abstract

IntroductionSeveral direct‐to‐consumer (DTC) genetic testing companies have emerged that claim to be able to test for susceptibility for musculoskeletal injuries. Although there are several publications on the emergence of this industry, none have critically evaluated the evidence for the use of genetic polymorphisms in commercial tests. The aim of this review was to identify, where possible, the polymorphisms and to evaluate the current scientific evidence for their inclusion.ResultsThe most common polymorphisms included COL1A1 rs1800012, COL5A1 rs12722, and GDF5 rs143383. The current evidence suggests that it is premature or even not viable to include these three polymorphisms as markers of injury risk. A unique set of injury‐specific polymorphisms, which do not include COL1A1, COL5A1, or GDF5, identified from genome‐wide association studies (GWAS) is used by one company in their tests for 13 sports injuries. However, of the 39 reviewed polymorphisms, 22 effective alleles are rare and absent in African, American, and/or Asian populations. Even when informative in all populations, the sensitivity of many of the genetic markers was low and/or has not been independently validated in follow‐up studies.ConclusionsThe current evidence suggests it is premature to include any of the reviewed polymorphisms identified by GWAS or candidate gene approaches in commercial genetic tests. The association of MMP7 rs1937810 with Achilles tendon injuries, and SAP30BP rs820218 and GLCCI1 rs4725069 with rotator cuff injuries does warrant further investigation. Based on current evidence, it remains premature to market any commercial genetic test to determine susceptibility to musculoskeletal injuries.