How should we address the inevitable harms from non-negligent variant reclassification in predictive genetic testing?

2Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

The process of interpreting genetic variants, in which experts use all available evidence to determine whether an identified variant is associated with a current or future disease, is both scientific and nevertheless subjective. In this paper, we summarize the existing evidence that any given variant could be reclassified and that such a reclassification could lead to harm. Furthermore, the racial gap in genetic databases could lead to a higher likelihood of harm for non-white patients. We also review recent legal analyses indicating it is unlikely that an individual who sues for restitution would be successful, especially in the absence of evidence of lab negligence. We then propose a compensation program for medical genetic tests to ensure that individuals who experience demonstrable harm due to a variant reclassification can be made whole financially. We conclude by discussing outstanding questions that must be answered for such a program to be feasible.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Rashkin, M., Kingham, K., Lara-Otero, K., Mckenna, M., Villiers, J., Worthington, M. M., & Prince, A. (2023). How should we address the inevitable harms from non-negligent variant reclassification in predictive genetic testing? Journal of Genetic Counseling, 32(1), 18–30. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgc4.1638

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free