How is genetic testing evaluated? A systematic review of the literature

open8Given the rapid development of genetic tests, an assessment of their benefits, risks, and limitations is crucial for public health practice. We performed a systematic review aimed at identifying and comparing the existing evaluation frameworks for genetic tests. We searched PUBMED, SCOPUS, ISI Web of Knowledge, Google Scholar, Google, and gray literature sources for any documents describing such frameworks. We identified 29 evaluation frameworks published between 2000 and 2017, mostly based on the ACCE Framework (n = 13 models), or on the HTA process (n = 6), or both (n = 2). Others refer to the Wilson and Jungner screening criteria (n = 3) or to a mixture of different criteria (n = 5). Due to the widespread use of the ACCE Framework, the most frequently used evaluation criteria are analytic and clinical validity, clinical utility and ethical, legal and social implications. Less attention is given to the context of implementation. An economic dimension is always considered, but not in great detail. Consideration of delivery models, organizational aspects, and consumer viewpoint is often lacking. A deeper analysis of such context-related evaluation dimensions may strengthen a comprehensive evaluation of genetic tests and support the decision-making process.openPitini, Erica*; de Vito, Corrado; Marzuillo, Carolina; D’Andrea, Elvira; Rosso, Annalisa; Federici, Antonio; Di Maria, Emilio; Villari, PaoloPitini, Erica; de Vito, Corrado; Marzuillo, Carolina; D’Andrea, Elvira; Rosso, Annalisa; Federici, Antonio; Di Maria, Emilio; Villari, Paol

Realizing the promise of population biobanks: a new model for translation

The promise of science lies in expectations of its benefits to societies and is matched by expectations of the realisation of the significant public investment in that science. In this paper, we undertake a methodological analysis of the science of biobanking and a sociological analysis of translational research in relation to biobanking. Part of global and local endeavours to translate raw biomedical evidence into practice, biobanks aim to provide a platform for generating new scientific knowledge to inform development of new policies, systems and interventions to enhance the public’s health. Effectively translating scientific knowledge into routine practice, however, involves more than good science. Although biobanks undoubtedly provide a fundamental resource for both clinical and public health practice, their potentiating ontology—that their outputs are perpetually a promise of scientific knowledge generation—renders translation rather less straightforward than drug discovery and treatment implementation. Biobanking science, therefore, provides a perfect counterpoint against which to test the bounds of translational research. We argue that translational research is a contextual and cumulative process: one that is necessarily dynamic and interactive and involves multiple actors. We propose a new multidimensional model of translational research which enables us to imagine a new paradigm: one that takes us from bench to bedside to backyard and beyond, that is, attentive to the social and political context of translational science, and is cognisant of all the players in that process be they researchers, health professionals, policy makers, industry representatives, members of the public or research participants, amongst others

Personal genome testing: Test characteristics to clarify the discourse on ethical, legal and societal issues

Background: As genetics technology proceeds, practices of genetic testing have become more heterogeneous: many different types of tests are finding their way to the public in different settings and for a variety of purposes. This diversification is relevant to the discourse on ethical, legal and societal issues (ELSI) surrounding genetic testing, which must evolve to encompass these differences. One important development is the rise of personal genome testing on the basis of genetic profiling: the testing of multiple genetic variants simultaneously for the prediction of common multifactorial diseases. Currently, an increasing number of companies are offering personal genome tests directly to consumers and are spurring ELSI-discussions, which stand in need of clarification. This paper presents a systematic approach to the ELSI-evaluation of personal genome testing for multifactorial diseases along the lines of its test characteristics. Discussion: This paper addresses four test characteristics of personal genome testing: its being a non-targeted type of testing, its high analytical validity, low clinical validity and problematic clinical utility. These characteristics raise their own specific ELSI, for example: non-targeted genetic profiling poses serious problems for information provision and informed consent. Questions about the quantity and quality of the necessary information, as well as about moral responsibilities with regard to the provision of information are therefore becoming central themes within ELSI-discussions of personal genome testing. Further, the current low level of clinical validity of genetic profiles raises questions concerning societal risks and regulatory requirements, whereas simultaneously it causes traditional ELSI-issues of clinical genetics, such as psychological and health risks, discrimination, and stigmatization, to lose part of their relevance. Also, classic notions of clinical utility are challenged by the newer notion of 'personal utility.' Summary: Consideration of test characteristics is essential to any valuable discourse on the ELSI of personal genome testing for multifactorial diseases. Four key characteristics of the test - targeted/non-targeted testing, analytical validity, clinical validity and clinical utility - together determine the applicability and the relevance of ELSI to specific tests. The paper identifies and discusses four areas of interest for the ELSI-debate on personal genome testing: informational problems, risks, regulatory issues, and the notion of personal utility

Personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer: ENVISION consensus statement

Abstract: The European Collaborative on Personalized Early Detection and Prevention of Breast Cancer (ENVISION) brings together several international research consortia working on different aspects of the personalized early detection and prevention of breast cancer. In a consensus conference held in 2019, the members of this network identified research areas requiring development to enable evidence-based personalized interventions that might improve the benefits and reduce the harms of existing breast cancer screening and prevention programmes. The priority areas identified were: 1) breast cancer subtype-specific risk assessment tools applicable to women of all ancestries; 2) intermediate surrogate markers of response to preventive measures; 3) novel non-surgical preventive measures to reduce the incidence of breast cancer of poor prognosis; and 4) hybrid effectiveness–implementation research combined with modelling studies to evaluate the long-term population outcomes of risk-based early detection strategies. The implementation of such programmes would require health-care systems to be open to learning and adapting, the engagement of a diverse range of stakeholders and tailoring to societal norms and values, while also addressing the ethical and legal issues. In this Consensus Statement, we discuss the current state of breast cancer risk prediction, risk-stratified prevention and early detection strategies, and their implementation. Throughout, we highlight priorities for advancing each of these areas

Long-term efficacy of fulguration of trigonitis for recurrent urinary tract infections in women

Objective: Women with a longstanding history of recurrent urinary tract infections (RUTIs) represent a challenging population because of gradual development of antibiotic resistance and frequent antibiotic allergies. We report on the long-term results of women with RUTIs and trigonitis who were treated using endoscopic fulguration and were prospectively followed. Materials and methods: Following institutional review board approval, charts of non-neurogenic women with RUTIs (defined as ≥3 UTIs/y), no voiding dysfunction or incontinence, and normal upper tracts by imaging, who underwent cystoscopy with fulguration of trigonitis (CFT) under anesthesia with 1 year minimum follow up after CFT, were reviewed. Trigonitis was defined as a condition of inflammation of the trigone region of the bladder. The primary outcome was complete resolution of trigonitis based on follow-up office cystoscopy 6 months after CFT. The secondary outcome was the total number of antibiotic courses (AC) prescribed for UTI-related symptoms and/or positive urine cultures (PUC) following CFT. We hypothesized that patients with complete trigonitis resolution after CFT fared best. Results: From 2004 to 2008, 33 women met the inclusion criteria with a mean follow up of 48 ± 19 months (range, 14–82 months). Resolution of trigonitis at 6 months was noted in 25 (76%) patients. This group averaged 0.51 ± 0.5 total AC and/or PUC/y compared with 2.03 ± 1.1 total AC and/or PUC/y for women with persistent trigonitis following CFT (p = 0.006). Conclusion: Patients with resolved trigonitis at 6 months after CFT did best; however, both groups benefited from the procedure over time