Genomic Risk Profiling: Attitudes and Use in Personal and Clinical Care of Primary Care Physicians Who Offer Risk Profiling

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Genomic risk profiling involves the analysis of genetic variations linked through statistical associations to a range of disease states. There is considerable controversy as to how, and even whether, to incorporate these tests into routine medical care. OBJECTIVE: To assess physician attitudes and uptake of genomic risk profiling among an 'early adopter' practice group. DESIGN: We surveyed members of MDVIP, a national group of primary care physicians (PCPs), currently offering genomic risk profiling as part of their practice. POPULATION: All physicians in the MDVIP network (N =356) RESULTS: We obtained a 44% response rate. One third of respondents had ordered a test for themselves and 42% for a patient. The odds of having ordered personal testing were 10.51-fold higher for those who felt well-informed about genomic risk testing (p < 0.0001). Of those who had not ordered a test for themselves, 60% expressed concerns for patients regarding discrimination by life and longterm/disability insurers, 61% about test cost, and 62% about clinical utility. The odds of ordering testing for their patients was 8.29-fold higher among respondents who had ordered testing for themselves (p < 0.0001). Of those who had ordered testing for patients, concerns about insurance coverage (p = 0.014) and uncertain clinical utility (p = 0.034) were associated with a lower relative frequency of intention to order testing again in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that respondent familiarity was a key predictor of physician ordering behavior and clinical utility was a primary concern for genomic risk profiling. Educational and interpretive support may enhance uptake of genomic risk profiling.

Public attitudes towards genomic risk profiling as a component of routine population screening

“…Participants in the present study indicated a similar expectation that health care professionals across the board will be engaged in the implementation of many types of PM applications, especially in the preventive medicine context. Confidence with genetic and genomic information was expected and has been shown to be important in this respect; a recent survey indicated that general practitioners who felt well-informed about genetics were over 10 times more likely to order a genomic risk profile (Haga et al 2011). Educational interventions can improve physician knowledge of genetics and reported confidence in the management of individuals with genetic conditions (Carroll et al 2009(Carroll et al , 2011.…”

Academic Medical Centers: Ripe for Rapid-Learning Personalized Health Care

“…e importance of education in the application of pharmacogenetics has been described (19), but at present there are no broad initiatives to orchestrate genetics and genomics education of medical professionals, trainees, and the public at large. Basic genomic literacy is critical for patients, physicians, and communities if these groups are to engage in the translational research and clinical studies that are required to bring about a change in health care paradigms (20). In addition, providers should be well versed in the role of social determinants of health and the importance of cra ing care plans that take into account a patient's personal circumstances.…”

The Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act (GINA): Public Policy and Medical Practice in the Age of Personalized Medicine

“…1 But the road to achieving those goals presents various challenges. 2 Although there are now a plethora of tests that can identify the existence of specific genes that confer increased risk of disease, for example, scientists do not yet have the ability to make accurate predictions about the likelihood that these genes will lead to particular diseases. In addition to the scientific challenges, there are a variety of unresolved policy questions.…”