American Academy of Family Physicians

Printer-friendly version

Share this on AAFP Connection

Share this page

GAO Report Critical of Genetic Tests Marketed to Consumers

FDA Working to Regulate Products

By News Staff

Direct-to-consumer genetic tests provide results that are misleading and of little or no practical use, according to a report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, or GAO.
Graphic illustration showing DNA helix, chromosomes, etc.
Gregory Kutz, the GAO's managing director of forensic audits and special investigations, delivered the report July 22 during a hearing of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations.

The GAO had testified during a 2006 hearing that some direct-to-consumer genetic tests make medically unproven disease predictions. Congress then asked the GAO to investigate products on the market and the methods used to market them.

In response, the GAO purchased a total of 40 such tests, ranging in cost from $299 to $999, from four different companies. Investigators then selected five donors and sent two DNA samples from each donor -- one using factual information about the donor and one using fabricated information -- to each test company for evaluation.

"Each donor's factual profile received disease risk predictions that varied across all four companies, indicating that identical DNA can yield contradictory results depending solely on the company it was sent to for analysis," Kutz testified in last month's hearing. "These risk predictions often conflicted with the donors' factual illnesses and family medical histories."

Investigators found 10 "egregious examples of deceptive marketing," including claims made by the four companies that a customer's DNA could be used to make personalized supplements capable of curing diseases.

Kutz said two of the companies recommended expensive dietary supplements that actually were "inexpensive multivitamins available at any drug store."

Jeff Shuren, M.D., J.D., director of the FDA's Center for Devices and Radiological Health, testified that the FDA has approved several genetic tests since 2003, but he said none of the tests marketed directly to consumers have been subject to premarket review by the agency.

Shuren said there are two ways for genetic tests used in clinical management of patients to reach the marketplace. One is for a manufacturer to develop a commercial test kit that can be distributed to multiple laboratories. He said the agency has approved several tests for specific genetic factors.

The second path is through the development of a test by a laboratory for use only by that lab. Shuren said there are as many as 5,000 such laboratory-developed tests on the market, and hundreds of different laboratories offer them.

Shuren added that the FDA has observed numerous problems with such tests and their marketing in recent years, including the presentation of fraudulent data, faulty data analysis, exaggerated clinical claims, poor clinical study design and unacceptable clinical performance.

"These tests have not been proven safe, effective or accurate," Shuren said, "and patients could be put at risk by making medical decisions based on data that has not received independent premarket review."

Shuren said the FDA is working to regulate genetic tests to "give patients and doctors confidence in these tests and facilitate progress in personalized medicine."

The FDA intervened earlier this year when Pathway Genomics Corp. announced that its Pathway Genomics Genetic Health Report would be available directly to consumers through Walgreens stores. The agency sent notice to the manufacturer that the FDA had not approved its product.

Since that time, the FDA has contacted more than a dozen other companies that market tests directly to consumers.

According to Shuren, more than 350 U.S. laboratories have voluntarily listed themselves on a website that provides information about labs offering genetic tests, but he estimated that the actual number of labs that offer such tests may be twice that figure.

Share this on AAFP Connection

Search AAFP News Now

 

Health of the Public

Though Waning, H7N9 Still Poses Pandemic Potential

AUA Says No to Routine PSA Screening

AAFP Criticizes Appeal of Plan B One-Step Ruling

AAFP to Hospitals: Stop Early Elective Deliveries

AAFP, USPSTF Differ Somewhat on HIV Screening Guidance

Zoledronic Acid Confers Both Pros, Cons

ACP Issues Guidance on PSA Screening

Abbott Recalls FreeStyle InsuLinx Blood Glucose Meter

Discuss Drug Options With Women at Risk for Breast Cancer

Shingles Vaccine Effective, But Uptake Is Low

Evidence Lacking to Make Oral Cancer Screening Recommendation

Two External Guidelines Get Qualified AAFP Endorsement

USPSTF Recommends BRCA Testing for High-risk Women

Primary Care, Public Health Look for Ways to Integrate

Malfunction Prompts Glucose Meter Recall

Evidence Lacking on PAD Screening, Says USPSTF

Azithromycin Poses Arrhythmia Risk, Says FDA

Vets With PTSD Often Prescribed Inappropriate Meds

AIM-HI Offers Grants to Combat Childhood Obesity

USPSTF Says No to Low-dose Vitamin D, Calcium to Prevent Fractures

PCV13, HibMenCY Vaccine Changes Approved by ACIP

AAFP, Other Groups Release More Choosing Wisely Lists

National Office Champions Tobacco Cessation Project Successful

USPSTF Issues Draft Statement on Glaucoma Screening

Study Examines Overuse, Inappropriate Use of Health Services

Apply to Become an AAFP Vaccine Science Fellow

Study Looks to Reduce PSA Screening Risks

AAP Issues New Clinical Guidance on Type 2 Diabetes

CDC: Adult Vaccination Rates Still Too Low

Pertussis Outbreaks Declining, but Immunization Still Key

2013 Immunization Schedules Include Several Changes

FDA Warns of Liver Injury Risk With Samsca Use

FDA Approves First Recombinant Trivalent Influenza Vaccine

AAFP, USPSTF: Screen Women of Childbearing Age for Partner Violence

Breast Cancer Screening in Older Women Costly, Likely Ineffective

CDC Gives Flu Update, Urges Continued Vaccination

Aerobic Exercise Beats Resistance Training for Weight Control