The incidence of cancer is continuing to rise and risk-tailored early diagnostic and/or primary prevention strategies are urgently required. The ideal risk-predictive test should: integrate the effects of both genetic and nongenetic factors and aim to capture these effects using an approach that is both biologically stable and technically reproducible; derive a score from easily accessible biological samples that acts as a surrogate for the organ in question; and enable the effectiveness of risk-reducing measures to be monitored. Substantial evidence has accumulated suggesting that the epigenome and, in particular, DNA methylation-based tests meet all of these requirements. However, the development and implementation of DNA methylation-based risk-prediction tests poses considerable challenges. In particular, the cell type specificity of DNA methylation and the extensive cellular heterogeneity of the easily accessible surrogate cells that might contain information relevant to less accessible tissues necessitates the use of novel methods in order to account for these confounding issues. Furthermore, the engagement of the scientific community with health-care professionals, policymakers and the public is required in order to identify and address the organizational, ethical, legal, social and economic challenges associated with the routine use of epigenetic testing.
We studied the experiences of children identified by family screening who were found to be a mutation carrier for a genetic cardiovascular disease (Long QT Syndrome (LQTS), Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy (HCM), Familial Hypercholesterolemia (FH)). We addressed the (a) manner in which they perceive their carrier status, (b) impact on their daily lives, and (c) strategy used to cope with these consequences. Children (aged 8-18) who tested positive for LQTS (n=11), HCM (n=6) or FH (n=16), and their parents participated in semi-structured audiotaped interviews. Interview topics included illness perception, use of medication, lifestyle modifications, worries, and coping. Each interview was coded by two researchers. The qualitative analysis was guided by Leventhal's model of self-regulation. The children were overall quite articulate about the disease they were tested for, including its mode of inheritance. They expressed positive future health perceptions, but feelings of controllability varied. Adherence and side-effects were significant themes with regard to medication-use. Refraining from activities and maintaining a non-fat diet were themes concerning lifestyle modifications. Some children spontaneously reported worries about the possibility of dying and frustration about being different from peers. Children coped with these worries by expressing faith in the effectiveness of medication, trying to be similar to peers or, in contrast, emphasizing their "being different." Children generally appeared effective in the way they coped with their carrier status and its implications. Nevertheless, dealing with the daily implications of their condition remains difficult in some situations, warranting continued availability of psychosocial support.
Women do not consider themselves to be part of the target group for preconception care. In some aspects, subjective norms around the process of becoming pregnant may conflict with the current practice of preconception care. Recommendations are provided.
In the debate surrounding the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) in prenatal screening programmes, the concept of routinisation is often used to refer to concerns and potential negative consequences of the test. A literature analysis shows that routinisation has many different meanings, which can be distinguished in three major versions of the concept. Each of these versions comprises several inter-related fears and concerns regarding prenatal screening and particularly regarding NIPT in three areas: (1) informed choice, (2) freedom to choose and (3) consequences for people with a disability. Three of the strongest arguments raised under the flag of routinisation are assessed for their validity: the threat that NIPT poses to informed choice, the potential increase in uptake of first-trimester prenatal screening and its consequences for social pressure to participate in screening or terminate affected pregnancies, and the negative consequences for disabled people. These routinisation arguments lack empirical or normative ground. However, the results of this analysis do not imply that no attention should be paid to possible problems surrounding the introduction of NIPT. At least two problems remain and should be addressed: there should be an ongoing debate about the requirements of informed choice, particularly related to an expanded scope of prenatal screening. Also, reproductive autonomy can only be achieved when expecting parents' options are variegated, real and valuable, so that they can continue to choose whether or not to screen or to terminate a pregnancy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.