Shawneequa L. Callier

Will Precision Medicine Move Us beyond Race

Although self-identified race may correlate with geographical ancestry, it does not predict an individual patients genotype or drug response. Precision medicine may eventually replace the use of race in treatment decisions, but several hurdles will have to be overcome.

Swabbing Students: Should Universities Be Allowed to Facilitate Educational DNA Testing?

Recognizing the profound need for greater patient and provider familiarity with personalized genomic medicine, many university instructors are including personalized genotyping as part of their curricula. During seminars and lectures students run polymerase chain reactions on their own DNA or evaluate their experiences using direct-to-consumer genetic testing services subsidized by the university. By testing for genes that may influence behavioral or health-related traits, however, such as alcohol tolerance and cancer susceptibility, certain universities have stirred debate on the ethical concerns raised by educational genotyping. Considering the potential for psychosocial harm and medically relevant outcomes, how far should university-facilitated DNA testing be permitted to go? The analysis here distinguishes among these learning initiatives and critiques their approaches to the ethical concerns raised by educational genotyping.

How anonymous is ‘anonymous’? Some suggestions towards a coherent universal coding system for genetic samples

So-called ‘anonymous’ tissue samples are widely used in research. Because they lack externally identifying information, they are viewed as useful in reconciling conflicts between the control, privacy and confidentiality interests of those from whom the samples originated and the public (or commercial) interest in carrying out research, as reflected in ‘consent or anonymise’ policies. High level guidance documents suggest that withdrawal of consent and samples and the provision of feedback are impossible in the case of anonymous samples. In view of recent developments in science and consumer-driven genomics the authors argue that such statements are misleading and only muddle complex ethical questions about possible entitlements to control over samples. The authors therefore propose that terms such as ‘anonymised’, ‘anonymous’ or ‘non-identifiable’ be removed entirely from documents describing research samples, especially from those aimed at the public. This is necessary as a matter of conceptual clarity and because failure to do so may jeopardise public trust in the governance of large scale databases. As there is wide variation in the taxonomy for tissue samples and no uniform national or international standards, the authors propose that a numeral-based universal coding system be implemented that focuses on specifying incremental levels of identifiability, rather than use terms that imply that the reidentification of research samples and associated actions are categorically impossible.

Diversity and inclusion in genomic research: why the uneven progress?

Conducting genomic research in diverse populations has led to numerous advances in our understanding of human history, biology, and health disparities, in addition to discoveries of vital clinical significance. Conducting genomic research in diverse populations is also important in ensuring that the genomic revolution does not exacerbate health disparities by facilitating discoveries that will disproportionately benefit well-represented populations. Despite the general agreement on the need for genomic research in diverse populations in terms of equity and scientific progress, genomic research remains largely focused on populations of European descent. In this article, we describe the rationale for conducting genomic research in diverse populations by reviewing examples of advances facilitated by their inclusion. We also explore some of the factors that perpetuate the disproportionate attention on well-represented populations. Finally, we discuss ongoing efforts to ameliorate this continuing bias. Collaborative and intensive efforts at all levels of research, from the funding of studies to the publication of their findings, will be necessary to ensure that genomic research does not conserve historical inequalities or curtail the contribution that genomics could make to the health of all humanity.

Engaging the next generation of healthcare professionals in genomics: planning for the future

There is broad agreement that healthcare professionals require fundamental training in genomics to keep pace with scientific advancement. Strong models that promote effective genomic education, however, are lacking. Furthermore, curricula at many institutions are now straining to adapt to the integration of additional material on next-generation sequencing and the bioethical and legal issues that will accompany clinical genomic testing. This article advocates for core competencies focused on job function, which will best prepare providers to be end-users of healthcare information. In addition, it argues in favor of online and blended learning models that incorporate student genotyping and specific training in the ethical, legal and social issues raised by genomic testing.

Impact of a personal CYP2D6 testing workshop on physician assistant student attitudes toward pharmacogenetics

AIM We assessed the impact of personal CYP2D6 testing on physician assistant student competency in, and attitudes toward, pharmacogenetics (PGx). MATERIALS & METHODS Buccal samples were genotyped for CYP2D6 polymorphisms. Results were discussed during a 3-h PGx workshop. PGx knowledge was assessed by pre- and post-tests. Focus groups assessed the impact of the workshop on attitudes toward the clinical utility of PGx. RESULTS Both student knowledge of PGx, and its perceived clinical utility, increased immediately following the workshop. However, exposure to PGx on clinical rotations following the workshop seemed to influence student attitudes toward PGx utility. CONCLUSION Personal CYP2D6 testing improves both knowledge and comfort with PGx. Continued exposure to PGx concepts is important for transfer of learning.

Genomic data-sharing: what will be our legacy?

Prior to 1974, the Tuskegee Syphilis experiments, expansive use of the HeLa cells, and other blatant instances of research abuse pervaded the medical research field. Ongoing challenges to informed consent, privacy and data-sharing will influence the stories that research participants today share with future generations. This has significant implications for the advancement of genomic science, and the publics perception of genomic research.

Trust, Precision Medicine Research, and Equitable Participation of Underserved Populations

Through the use of culturally appropriate videos on precision medicine research (PMR) that were developed and tailored to five racial and ethnic groups of patients, and subsequent focus-group discu...

Genetic Privacy in Sports: Clearing the Hurdles

As genomic medicine continues to advance and inform clinical care, knowledge gained is likely to influence sports medicine and training practices. Susceptibility to injury, sudden cardiac failure, and other serious conditions may one day be tackled on a subclinical level through genetic testing programs. In addition, athletes may increasingly consider using genetic testing services to maximize their performance potential. This paper assesses the role of privacy and genetic discrimination laws that would apply to athletes who engage in genetic testing and the limits of these protections.

Taking a Stand: The Genetics Community's Responsibility for Intelligence Research

There is a longstanding debate about genetics research into intelligence. Some scholars question the value of focusing on genetic contributions to intelligence in a society where social and environmental determinants powerfully influence cognitive ability and educational outcomes. Others warn that censoring certain research questions, such as inquiries about genetic differences in intellectual potential, compromises academic freedom. Still others view interest in this subject as a corollary to a long and troublesome history of eugenics research. The dawn of a new era in genome sequencing as a commodity will sustain scientific interest in the genetics of intelligence for the foreseeable future, but deep-rooted challenges threaten the scientific merit of the research. The use of imprecise definitions of study populations, the difficult nature of studying the environment, and the potential of researcher bias are inextricably linked with concerns about the trustworthiness and utility of research in this area. Leadership by the genetics community is essential to ensure the value and trustworthiness of these studies.