Effect of Rhesus D incompatibility on schizophrenia depends on offspring sex.

Rhesus D incompatibility increases risk for schizophrenia, with some evidence that risk is limited to male offspring. The purpose of this study is to determine whether risk for schizophrenia due to Rhesus D incompatibility differs by offspring sex using a nuclear family-based candidate gene approach and a meta-analysis approach. The genetic study is based on a sample of 277 nuclear families with RHD genotype data on at least one parent and at least one child diagnosed with schizophrenia or related disorder. Meta-analysis inclusion criteria were (1) well-defined sample of schizophrenia patients with majority born before 1970, (2) Rhesus D incompatibility phenotype or genotype data available on mother and offspring, and by offspring sex. Two of ten studies, plus the current genetic study sample, fulfilled these criteria, for a total of 358 affected males and 226 affected females. The genetic study found that schizophrenia risk for incompatible males was significantly greater than for compatible offspring (p=0.03), while risk for incompatible and compatible females was not significantly different (p=.32). Relative risks for incompatible males and females were not significantly different from each other. Meta-analysis using a larger number of affected males and females supports their difference. Taken together, these results provide further support that risk of schizophrenia due to Rhesus D incompatibility is limited to incompatible males, although a weak female incompatibility effect cannot be excluded. Sex differences during fetal neurodevelopment should be investigated to fully elucidate the etiology of schizophrenia

Using the maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility test to assess non-inherited maternal HLA-DRB1 antigen coding alleles as rheumatoid arthritis risk factors

Non-inherited maternal antigens encoded by specific HLA-DRB1 alleles (NIMA) have been implicated as a rheumatoid arthritis (RA) risk factor. Using genotype data from North American Rheumatoid Arthritis Consortium study participants and the maternal-fetal genotype incompatibility (MFG) test, we find evidence for offspring allelic effects but no evidence for NIMA as a RA risk factor. We discuss possible reasons why our result conflicts with several previous studies (including one of our own) that used RA patients from northern Europe

Impact of genetic counseling and Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 testing on deaf identity and comprehension of genetic test results in a sample of deaf adults: a prospective, longitudinal study.

Using a prospective, longitudinal study design, this paper addresses the impact of genetic counseling and testing for deafness on deaf adults and the Deaf community. This study specifically evaluated the effect of genetic counseling and Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 genetic test results on participants' deaf identity and understanding of their genetic test results. Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 genetic testing was offered to participants in the context of linguistically and culturally appropriate genetic counseling. Questionnaire data collected from 209 deaf adults at four time points (baseline, immediately following pre-test genetic counseling, 1-month following genetic test result disclosure, and 6-months after result disclosure) were analyzed. Four deaf identity orientations (hearing, marginal, immersion, bicultural) were evaluated using subscales of the Deaf Identity Development Scale-Revised. We found evidence that participants understood their specific genetic test results following genetic counseling, but found no evidence of change in deaf identity based on genetic counseling or their genetic test results. This study demonstrated that culturally and linguistically appropriate genetic counseling can improve deaf clients' understanding of genetic test results, and the formation of deaf identity was not directly related to genetic counseling or Connexin-26 and Connexin-30 genetic test results

Using a social marketing framework to evaluate recruitment of a prospective study of genetic counseling and testing for the deaf community

BACKGROUND: Recruiting deaf and hard-of-hearing participants, particularly sign language-users, for genetics health service research is challenging due to communication barriers, mistrust toward genetics, and researchers’ unfamiliarity with deaf people. Feelings of social exclusion and lack of social cohesion between researchers and the Deaf community are factors to consider. Social marketing is effective for recruiting hard-to-reach populations because it fosters social inclusion and cohesion by focusing on the targeted audience’s needs. For the deaf population this includes recognizing their cultural and linguistic diversity, their geography, and their systems for information exchange. Here we use concepts and language from social marketing to evaluate our effectiveness to engage a U.S. deaf population in a prospective, longitudinal genetic counseling and testing study. METHODS: The study design was interpreted in terms of a social marketing mix of Product, Price, Place, and Promotion. Price addressed linguistic diversity by including a variety of communication technologies and certified interpreters to facilitate communication; Place addressed geography by including community-based participation locations; Promotion addressed information exchange by using multiple recruitment strategies. Regression analyses examined the study design’s effectiveness in recruiting a culturally and linguistically diverse sample. RESULTS: 271 individuals were enrolled, with 66.1% American Sign Language (ASL)-users, 19.9% ASL + English-users, 12.6% English-users. Language was significantly associated with communication technology, participation location, and recruitment. Videophone and interpreters were more likely to be used for communication between ASL-users and researchers while voice telephone and no interpreters were preferred by English-users (Price). ASL-users were more likely to participate in community-based locations while English-users preferred medically-based locations (Place). English-users were more likely to be recruited through mass media (Promotion) while ASL-users were more likely to be recruited through community events and to respond to messaging that emphasized inclusion of a Deaf perspective. CONCLUSIONS: This study design effectively engaged the deaf population, particularly sign language-users. Results suggest that the deaf population’s cultural and linguistic diversity, geography, and forms of information exchange must be taken into account in study designs for successful recruitment. A social marketing approach that incorporates critical social determinants of health provides a novel and important framework for genetics health service research targeting specific, and hard-to-reach, underserved groups

Effect of pre-test genetic counseling for deaf adults on knowledge of genetic testing.

Empirical data on genetic counseling outcomes in the deaf population are needed to better serve this population. This study was an examination of genetics knowledge before and after culturally and linguistically appropriate pre-test genetic counseling in a diverse deaf adult sample. Individuals ≥18 years old with early-onset sensorineural deafness were offered connexin-26/30 testing and genetic counseling. Participants completed questionnaires containing 10 genetics knowledge items at baseline and following pre-test genetic counseling. The effects of genetic counseling, prior beliefs about etiology, and participant's preferred language on genetics knowledge scores were assessed (n = 244). Pre-test genetic counseling (p = .0007), language (p < .0001), prior beliefs (p < .0001), and the interaction between counseling and beliefs (p = .035) were predictors of genetics knowledge. American Sign Language (ASL)-users and participants with "non-genetic/unknown" prior beliefs had lower knowledge scores than English-users and participants with "genetic" prior beliefs, respectively. Genetics knowledge improved after genetic counseling regardless of participants' language; knowledge change was greater for the "non-genetic/unknown" beliefs group than the "genetic" beliefs group. ASL-users' lower knowledge scores are consistent with evidence that ethnic and cultural minority groups have less genetics knowledge, perhaps from exposure and access disparities. Culturally and linguistically appropriate pre-test genetic counseling significantly improved deaf individuals' genetics knowledge. Assessing deaf individuals' prior beliefs is important for enhancing genetics knowledge

Family genetic result communication in rare and undiagnosed disease communities: Understanding the practice.

Genetic results have implications not only for the individual, but also for their family members. Research on family communication of genetic results has primarily focused on families affected by adult-onset, dominant conditions as well as more common genetic conditions such as familial hypercholesterolemia, cardiomyopathies, and genetic hearing loss. This study therefore aimed to characterize genetic result communication in families with rare and undiagnosed conditions and identify factors that influence communication. One hundred and forty-two individuals who received a diagnosis from the Undiagnosed Diseases Network (UDN), a study focused on providing diagnoses to individuals with undiagnosed conditions, were eligible to complete a survey assessing genetic results communication. Survey items assessed if communication was discussed with healthcare providers, with whom participants communicated genetic testing, why they chose to communicate with these family members, and what information they communicated. All respondents (5 adult UDN participants, 38 parents/guardians of UDN participants, and 2 identifying as both) shared genetic results with at least one family member. Individuals who identified as both were considered exclusively adult participants for the purpose of these analyses. Adult participants and parents/guardians of participants reported high levels of understanding (96%), utility (96%), and comfort communicating genetic results (89%). Additionally, parents/guardians were more likely to disclose genetic results due to a general desire to share (60% of parents/guardians vs. 14% adult participants), while adult participants reported that they shared results to communicate risk to family members (86% of adult participants vs. 24% of parents/guardians). Many respondents did not recall discussing with a healthcare provider how (64%) or what (42%) to communicate about results. The results of this study provide insight into the practice of result communication by individuals with rare and previously undiagnosed conditions, which can ideally inform development of more effective counseling strategies and guidelines to aid family communication