Russo Felicia, Chatterjee Debanjana, DeMaria Natalia, Florido Michelle E, Marasa Maddalena, Sabatello Maya, Wynn Julia, Milo Rasouly Hila
Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA.
Genetic Counseling Graduate Program, Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
J Community Genet. 2024 Dec;15(6):653-664. doi: 10.1007/s12687-024-00736-5. Epub 2024 Oct 7.
DNA-based population screening for adult-onset diseases holds promise for advancing personalized medicine and improving public health. Yet as most individuals pursuing such screening receive negative results, the return of results process must ensure that negative results and their implications are clearly understood. We explored the experiences of adults who received negative results from such screening as part of the Electronic Medical Records and Genomics consortium Phase 3 project (eMERGE-3) at Columbia University. In addition to a laboratory report and a standard counseling letter explaining the negative results, participants were randomized to receive (or not) a vignette explaining the results. A diverse cohort of 437 adult participants completed both baseline and post-result surveys. Many participants reported motivations that did not match the screening goals and included hope for diagnosis and family disease risk. A quarter of participants reported not feeling confident explaining their results to others (n = 105, 24%), and those who did not receive the vignette were less confident than those who did (29% versus 19% respectively; p-value = 0.02). Open-text responses about personal and family members' reactions to the results suggested that some perceived an exaggerated benefit from the negative result and might forgo more appropriate genetic testing. Our findings highlight the complexity of returning negative results and raise concerns that participants might forgo more suitable genetic testing. Future research is needed to compare the efficacy of different forms of ancillary materials on individuals' comprehension of negative results.
基于DNA的成人发病疾病群体筛查有望推动个性化医疗并改善公众健康。然而,由于大多数接受此类筛查的个体得到的是阴性结果,结果反馈过程必须确保阴性结果及其含义能被清楚理解。我们探讨了作为哥伦比亚大学电子病历与基因组学联盟三期项目(eMERGE-3)一部分,接受此类筛查得到阴性结果的成年人的经历。除了一份实验室报告和一封解释阴性结果的标准咨询信外,参与者被随机分配接受(或不接受)一个解释结果的案例。437名成年参与者组成的多样化队列完成了基线调查和结果后调查。许多参与者报告的动机与筛查目标不符,包括希望得到诊断和了解家族疾病风险。四分之一的参与者表示没有信心向他人解释自己的结果(n = 105,24%),未收到案例的参与者比收到案例的参与者信心更低(分别为29%和19%;p值 = 0.02)。关于个人及家庭成员对结果反应的开放式回答表明,一些人认为阴性结果有夸大的益处,可能会放弃更合适的基因检测。我们的研究结果凸显了反馈阴性结果的复杂性,并引发了对参与者可能放弃更合适基因检测的担忧。未来需要开展研究,比较不同形式辅助材料对个体理解阴性结果的效果。