Another study in the United Kingdom that also used genomic analysis to understand drug-resistant Shigella produced findings that may be useful for microbiologists and medical laboratory scientists
From the onset of an infectious disease outbreak, public health officials, microbiologists, and clinical laboratory managers find it valuable to trace the origin of the spread back to the “index case” or “patient zero”—the first documented patient in the disease epidemic. Given the decreased cost of genomic analysis and improved accuracy of gene sequencing, infectious disease researchers are finding that task easier and faster than ever.
One recent example is a genomic study conducted at University of Washington (UW) in Seattle that enabled researchers to “retrace” the origin and spread of a “multidrug-resistant Shigellosis outbreak” from 2017 to 2022. “The aim of the study was to better understand the community transmission of Shigella and spread of antimicrobial resistance in our population, and to treat these multi-drug resistant infections more effectively,” the UW scientists stated in a new release.
Shigellosis (aka, bacillary dysentery) is a highly contagious disease of the intestines that can lead to hospitalization. Symptoms include fever, stomach cramps, diarrhea, dysentery, and dehydration.
“Additional analysis of the gut pathogen and its transmission patterns helped direct approaches to testing, treatment, and public health responses,” the UW news release states.
Usually prevalent in countries with public health and sanitation limitations, the “opportunistic” Shigella pathogen is now being seen in high-income countries as well, UW reported.
“You can’t really expect an infectious disease to remain confined to a specific at-risk population. [Shigella infections are] very much an emerging threat and something where our public health tools and therapeutic tools have significant limitations,” infectious disease specialist Ferric Fang, MD (above) told CIDRAP News. Fang is a UW professor of Microbiology and Clinical Laboratory Medicine and a corresponding author of the UW study. (Photo copyright: University of Washington.)
Generally, Shigella infects children, travelers, and men who have sex with men (MSM), the CDC noted.
The UW researchers were motivated to study Shigella when they noticed an uptick in drug-resistant shigellosis cases in Seattle’s homeless population in 2020 at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy News (CIDRAP News) reported.
“Especially during the pandemic, a lot of public facilities were closed that homeless people were used to using,” infectious disease specialist Ferric Fang, MD, told CIDRAP News. Fang is Professor of Microbiology and Laboratory Medicine at University of Washington and corresponding author of the UW study.
The researchers studied 171 cases of Shigella identified from 2017 to 2022 by clinical laboratories at Harborview Medical Center and UW Medical Center in Seattle. According to CIDRAP News, the UW researchers found that:
46% were men who have sex with men (MSM).
51% were people experiencing homelessness (PEH).
Fifty-six patients were admitted to the hospital, with eight to an intensive care unit.
51% of isolates were multi-drug resistant (MDR).
Whole-Genome Sequencing Reveals Origin
The UW scientists characterized the stool samples of Shigella isolates by species identification, phenotypic susceptibility testing, and whole-genome sequencing, according to their Lancet Infectious Diseases paper. The paper also noted that 143 patients received antimicrobial therapy, and 70% of them benefited from the treatment for the Shigella infection.
Whole-genome sequencing revealed that two strains of Shigella (S. flexneri and S. sonnei) appeared first in Seattle’s MSM population before infecting the PEM population.
The genomic analysis found the outbreak of drug-resistant Shigella had international links as well, according to CIDRAP News:
One S. flexneri isolate was associated with a multi-drug resistant (MDR) strain from China, and
S. sonnei isolates resembled a strain characteristic of a current outbreak of MDR Shigella in England.
“The most prevalent lineage in Seattle was probably introduced to Washington State via international travel, with subsequent domestic transmission between at-risk groups,” the researchers wrote.
“Genomic analysis elucidated not only outbreak origin, but directed optimal approaches to testing, treatment, and public health response. Rapid diagnostics combined with detailed knowledge of local epidemiology can enable high rates of appropriate empirical therapy even in multidrug-resistant infection,” they continued.
UK Shigella Study Also Uses Genomics
Another study based in the United Kingdom (UK) used genomic analysis to investigate a Shigella outbreak as well.
Motivated by a UK Health Security Agency report of an increase in drug-resistance to common strains since 2021, the UK researchers studied Shigella cases from September 2015 to June 2022.
According to a paper they published in Lancet Infectious Diseases, the UK researchers “reported an increase in cases of sexually transmitted S. flexneri harboring blaCTX-M-27 (an antibiotic-resistant gene) in England, which is known to confer resistance to third-generation cephalosporins (antibiotics),” the researchers wrote.
Their analysis of plasmids (DNA with genes having antibiotic resistance) revealed a link in two drug-resistant Shigella strains at the same time, CIDRAP News explained.
“Our study reveals a worsening outlook regarding antimicrobial-resistant Shigella strains among MSM and highlights the value of continued integration of genomic analysis into surveillance and research,” the UK-based scientists wrote.
Current challenges associated with Shigella, especially as it evades treatment, may continue to demand attention from microbiologists, clinical laboratory scientists, and infectious disease specialists. Fortunately, use of genomic analysis—due to its ongoing improvements that have lowered cost and improved accuracy—has made it possible for public health researchers to better track the origins of disease outbreak and spread.
Project aims to create a new pangenome for genetic testing that will ensure better clinical laboratory testing and healthcare outcomes
Recent advances in genetics are motivating some scientists to proclaim the need to update the existing “master human genome”—currently based on a single individual’s genetic sequence—to make it more inclusive. This international research effort will have implications for personalized clinical laboratory testing and precision medicine.
Genetic scientists at the Human Pangenome Reference Consortium (HPRC), a project funded by the National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI), are working “to sequence and assemble genomes from individuals from diverse populations in order to better represent [the] genomic landscape of diverse human populations,” according to the organization’s website.
The project plans to evaluate a wide variety of reference genomes and develop a more diverse human pangenome (a multi-genome reference sequence) that will contain a larger cross-section of the human population. The HPRC scientists will be looking at genomes from specific countries, including Denmark, Japan, South Korea, Sweden, and the United Arab Emirates, The Guardian reported.
The increased diversity of reference genetic data will enable genomic researchers to increase the accuracy of precision medicine diagnostics and clinical laboratory testing.
“One person is not representative of the world,” Pui-Yan Kwok, MD, PhD (above), Henry Bachrach Distinguished Professor, Cardiovascular Research Institute at the University of California, San Francisco, told The Guardian. “As a result, most genome sequencing is fundamentally biased.” And that bias, the researchers claim, affects the accuracy of clinical laboratory treatments and diagnostics. (Photo copyright: UCSF.)
Reference Genome for Genetic Sequencing is Based on One Person
Launched in 1990, The Human Genome Project studied all DNA in a select set of organisms. The project completed its first sequence of the human genome in 2003, which became the reference genome for thousands of genomic discoveries since then.
But there’s a problem.
Although a revolutionary breakthrough in genetic sequencing, that reference genome came from just one person. This means a significant portion of the human population is not represented in genetic research, and that bias, according to some scientists, “limits the kind of genetic variation that can be detected, leaving some patients without diagnoses and potentially without proper treatment,” according to The Guardian.
“Getting the right medicine to the right patient at the right time is the tagline,” Neil Hanchard, MD, DPhil, physician scientist and senior investigator for precision health research at the NHGRI in Bethesda, Maryland, told The Guardian.
The HPRC’s goal is to help mitigate reference biases that could hamper disease diagnoses and ensure all populations receive the best treatments for illness.
According to its website, the organization’s main purpose includes:
Gene sequencing from a diverse set of samples with the newest technologies.
Fostering an ecosystem of assembly and pangenome tools.
Creating and releasing high-quality assemblies and pangenomes.
Embedding a team of scholars to address ethical, legal, and social implications of their work.
Forming international partnerships for the research.
HPRC Scientists Find Never-Sequenced Genetic Variants in Africa
Standard gene sequencing works by dividing DNA into tiny portions known as short reads, then sequencing and organizing the reads into a genome using an existing reference as a guide. However, this process renders larger blocks of variants, called structural variants (SVs), more difficult to read or even remain undetected, which can translate to a sequence that does not completely represent personal variations.
In 2019, the HPRC team of scientists analyzed genetic samples from 154 people from various parts of the world and discovered SV content that was missing from their reference sequence. A further study of genetic samples from 338 individuals that examined only extra inserted DNA detected the presence of almost 130,000 new sequences.
More recently, the HPRC researchers sampled 426 individuals from 50 ethnolinguistic groups from Africa and discovered a few million new single nucleotide variants (SNVs). Most of these distinct SNVs derived from populations that had not been previously sampled.
“We haven’t even touched SVs,” Hanchard told The Guardian. “But our preliminary data suggests it’s going to be more of the same.”
“We may miss risk variants in those regions not represented in the reference,” he added.
HPRC Receives Clearance from NHGRI to Continue Research
Hanchard recognizes the benefits of regional references in genomic sequencing and is optimistic about the future of genomics and the ability to sequence more diverse populations.
“I would love to get to a point where everyone feels represented and that this is for them, as much as it is for any particular group,” he told The Guardian. “We are from one humanity, that’s the important part.”
On February 13, the HPRC received concept clearance for renewal of the program from the NHGRI, which plans to commit up to $10 million in total costs per year for the program over the next five years.
Genetic sequencing continues to emerge as a vital tool in the diagnoses and treatment of diseases. Ensuring that as many diverse populations as possible are included in genomic research is an important element for precision medicine and optimal healthcare.
Clinical laboratory managers and pathologists will want to stay updated on these developments, because much of this new knowledge about the pangenome will need to be incorporated when interpreting genetic sequences and developing diagnoses in support of personalized medicine.
Study findings could lead to new biomarker targets for clinical laboratories working to identify AMR bacteria
Reducing and managing antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major goal of researchers and health systems across the globe. And it is the job of microbiologists and clinical laboratories to identify microbes that are AMR and those which are not to guide physicians as to the most appropriate therapies for patients with bacterial infections.
“AMR is a silent pandemic of much greater risk to society than COVID-19. In addition to 10 million deaths per year by 2050, the WHO estimates AMR will cost the global economy $100 trillion if we can’t find a way to combat antibiotic failure,” Timothy Barnett, PhD (above), Deputy Director and head of the Strep A Pathogenesis and Diagnostics team at Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases, told News Medical. Additional research may provide new targets for clinical laboratories tasked with identifying antimicrobial resistant bacteria. (Photo copyright: University of Western Australia.)
Rendering an Antibiotic Ineffective
According to the University of Oxford, about 1.2 million people died worldwide in 2019 due to AMR, and antimicrobial-resistant infections played a role in as many as 4.95 million deaths that same year. The World Health Organization (WHO) declared AMR one of the top ten global public health threats facing humanity.
While investigating antibiotic sensitivity of Group A Streptococcus—a potentially deadly bacteria often detected on the skin and in the throat—the Australian researchers uncovered a mechanism that enabled bacteria to absorb nutrients from their human host and evade the antibiotic sulfamethoxazole, a commonly-prescribed treatment for Group A Strep.
“Bacteria need to make their own folates to grow and, in turn, cause disease. Some antibiotics work by blocking this folate production to stop bacteria growing and treat the infection,” Timothy Barnett, PhD, Deputy Director of the Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases and head of the Strep A Pathogenesis and Diagnostics team, told News Medical.
“When looking at an antibiotic commonly prescribed to treat Group A Strep skin infections, we found a mechanism of resistance where, for the first time ever, the bacteria demonstrated the ability to take folates directly from its human host when blocked from producing their own. This makes the antibiotic ineffective and the infection would likely worsen when the patient should be getting better,” he added.
According to their study, the researchers identified an energy-coupling (ECF) factor transporter S component gene that allows Group A Strep to acquire extracellular reduced folate compounds that likely “expands the substrate specificity of an endogenous ECF transporter to acquire reduced folate compounds directly from the host, thereby bypassing the inhibition of folate biosynthesis by sulfamethoxazole.”
The study indicates that this new form of antibiotic resistance is indistinguishable under traditional testing used in microbiology and clinical laboratories, which in turn makes it difficult for clinicians to prescribe effective antibiotics to fight an infection.
Understanding AMR before It Is Too Late
The research suggests that understanding AMR is more complicated and intricate than previously thought. Barnett and his team believe their discovery is just the “tip of the iceberg” and that it will prove to be a far-reaching issue across other bacterial pathogens in addition to Group A Strep.
“Without antibiotics, we face a world where there will be no way to stop deadly infections, cancer patients won’t be able to have chemotherapy and people won’t have access to have life-saving surgeries,” Barnett told News Medical. “In order to preserve the long-term efficacy of antibiotics, we need to further identify and understand new mechanisms of antibiotic resistance, which will aid in the discovery of new antibiotics and allow us to monitor AMR as it arises.”
More research and clinical studies are needed before this discovery can become technology that clinical laboratories can use to test if microbes are AMR. The scientists at Wesfarmers Centre of Vaccines and Infectious Diseases are now developing testing methods to detect the presence of the antibiotic resistant mechanism and determine the best treatment options.
“It is vital we stay one step ahead of the challenges of AMR and, as researchers, we should continue to explore how resistance develops in pathogens and design rapid accurate diagnostic methods and therapeutics,” Kalindu Rodrigo, a PhD student in the Barnett lab and one of the authors of the study told News Medical. “On the other hand, equal efforts should be taken at all levels of the society including patients, health professionals, and policymakers to help reduce the impacts of AMR.”
These new insights might lead to a new line of clinical laboratory testing, particularly if the results could guide the patient to microbiome-based repellents that would remain effective for months once applied
Researchers are beginning to identify what compounds make individuals more attractive to mosquitos. That is a first step in the development of a biomarker that could be developed into a clinical laboratory test. Question is: would there be enough consumers wanting to do a lab test to determine if they were highly attractive to mosquitos, thus making this a revenue-generating test for labs?
The SA article reported on their study published in the journal Cell titled, “Differential Mosquito Attraction to Humans Is Associated with Skin-Derived Carboxylic Acid Levels.” The researchers, according to SA, found that individual humans have “a unique scent profile made up of different chemical compounds” and that “mosquitoes were most drawn to people whose skin produces high levels of carboxylic acids.” The researchers also found that “attractiveness to mosquitoes remained steady over time, regardless of changes in diet or grooming habits.”
At a minimum, there would be widespread consumer interest to at least understand why some individuals get more mosquito bites than others. What may be of particular interest to microbiologists is the statement by molecular biologist Omar Akbari, PhD, of the University of California, San Diego, who told Scientific American that by “taking human-colonizing skin bacteria … and engineering them in such a way that they can either express a repellent compound or be able to degrade something that’s attractive,” a mosquito repellant could be developed that would last for months once applied.
“This study clearly shows that these acids are important,” neurogeneticist Matthew DeGennaro, PhD (above), told CNN. “… how the mosquitoes perceive these carboxylic acids is interesting because these particular chemicals … are hard to smell at a distance. It could be that these chemicals are being altered by … the skin microbiome … if we understand why mosquitoes find a host, we can design new repellents that will block the mosquitoes from sensing those chemicals, and this could be used to improve our current repellents.” Clinical laboratory testing will be needed to produce biomarkers for developing such improved repellents. (Photo copyright: Laboratory of Tropical Genetics.)
Clinical Laboratory Testing Needed to Identify Levels of Carboxylic Acids
To complete their study, the researchers had 64 participants wear nylon stockings for six hours on their arms to get their unique scent into the fabric. The scent on the stockings was not discernible to the human nose, but it was to the mosquitos.
Two pieces of the nylon were then placed in a closed container with Aedes aegypti mosquitoes. The researchers found that certain samples were more popular with the mosquitos than others. Upon further analysis the researchers found that the most popular samples came from subjects with higher levels of carboxylic acids, and the least popular had the lowest levels. The scientists ran the test with the same participants several times over three years and the results remained largely the same.
Carboxylic acid is an organic compound found in humans in sebum, the oily layer protecting our skin. The level at which humans release carboxylic acid varies from person to person. And there is no discernible way the human nose can determine whether a person has the level of carboxylic acid on the skin that mosquitos find desirable. The answer would need to be determined by a diagnostic test performed in a clinical laboratory.
Although the development of a test to determine someone’s susceptibility to mosquitos may be far away, there could be significant consumer interest in developing such a test.
“The question of why some people are more attractive to mosquitoes than others—that’s the question that everybody asks,” Leslie B. Vosshall, PhD, Chief Scientific Officer, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, who led the research team to find out why some people are more attractive to mosquitos than others, told Scientific American. “My mother, my sister, people in the street, my colleagues—everybody wants to know.” She credits their interest as the inspiration for embarking on the study.
“Understanding what makes someone a ‘mosquito magnet’ will suggest ways to rationally design interventions such as skin microbiota manipulation to make people less attractive to mosquitoes. We propose that the ability to predict which individuals in a community are high attractors would allow for more effective deployment of resources to combat the spread of mosquito-borne pathogens,” the researchers wrote in their Cell paper.
Preventing Spread of Deadly Diseases
Although mosquitos are an annoyance, they also can be dangerous vectors of disease.
“Every bite of these mosquitoes puts people into public health danger. Aedes aegypti mosquitoes are vectors for dengue, yellow fever, and Zika,” Vosshall told CNN. “Those people who are magnets are going to be much more likely to be infected with viruses.”
Further research into these early findings may help develop diagnostic tests to protect against the spread of these diseases and identify individuals who are more attractive to the mosquitos, and therefore, more likely to contract and spread disease.
Being able to identify which individuals are mosquito magnets could help keep individuals safe from dangerous diseases, and development of a better repellent could also make outdoor summer events more bearable for the (unfortunately) popular among the pests. Medical laboratory tests associated with determining an individual’s susceptibility to mosquito bites could give clinical laboratories a new way to add value to consumers and patients.
Clinical laboratories could play a key role in helping users collect their samples correctly, interpret results, and transfer flu test data to their health records
Clinical laboratories may have another opportunity to provide service to their clients and the physicians who treat them. With the success of at-home COVID-19 testing, consumer demand for self-tests is changing and advances in diagnostic technology now make it feasible to make more influenza (flu) tests available for consumers to buy and use at home.
At-home tests for SARS-CoV-2 can be found at pharmacies all across America. But that’s not the case with tests for influenza.
Should self-test flu kits eventually become available and common, clinical laboratories could offer the service of helping consumers understand:
that the test was conducted correctly (specimen collection and analysis),
“Home flu testing would ensure that those who do need and receive antiviral medication for influenza are the ones who need it the most,” and that “we are making our treatment decisions based on data,” infectious disease specialist Christina Yen, MD (above), University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, told STAT News. At-home flu self-tests could also bring opportunities for clinical laboratories to provide service to healthcare consumers and the physicians who treat them. (Photo copyright: UT Southwestern Medical Center.)
Pros and Cons of Consumers Doing At-home Influenza Testing
According to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), COVID-19 and influenza are both upper respiratory illnesses with similar symptoms. So, why don’t we have more at-home flu tests available? Partly because at-home testing is a relatively new phenomenon in modern healthcare.
“It’s really rare, and it’s really new that people are allowed to know about what’s happening inside their body without a physician in the middle,” Harvard epidemiologist Michael Mina, MD, PhD, told STAT News. The article uses the example of at-home pregnancy tests. Despite a prototype for an at-home pregnancy test being created in 1967, it took another decade before an over-the-counter pregnancy test became available to the public.
“The general thinking was, ‘How could a woman possibly know what to do if she found out she was pregnant on her own without a doctor in the room?’ That is a ridiculous concern because women have been doing that for millions of years,” Mina added.
So, why be cautious when it comes to giving patients the option of at-home flu testing?
There are some cons to at-home influenza tests. Average citizens are not clinical laboratory professionals. They might obtain too little sample for an accurate reading or read the results incorrectly. Then, there is the possibility for false-negatives or false-positives.
An at-home test user is not likely to consider the possibility of a false result, however clinicians look at the situation with more nuance. If the patient was still symptomatic or in a high-risk community, the provider could administer a more sensitive medical laboratory test to confirm the previous test results.
“In a Facebook post from mid-November with hundreds of responses, concertgoers compared symptoms and positive test results, many of those from tests taken at home. But those data weren’t added to state public health tallies of COVID’s spread,” STAT News noted.
The larger concern is that samples obtained by at-home self-test users are not submitted for genomic sequencing. This could lead to incomplete data and delay identifying new variants of the coronavirus in communities.
Another barrier to at-home flu testing is that rapid influenza diagnostic testing can be unreliable. In 2009, the rapid influenza tests could only detect the H1N1 influenza virus in a mere 11% of samples, STAT News reported. Because of this, the FDA now requires manufacturers to test their rapid tests against eight different strains that change every year depending upon which strains are prevalent. This could present a problem if individuals use leftover tests from the previous flu season.
Do Pros of At-home Testing Outweigh the Cons?
At-home testing is convenient and makes testing more accessible to patients who may not be able to get to a clinic. Being able to test at home also encourages individuals to take precautions necessary to stop the spread of whichever illness they may have. Given the similarities in symptoms between influenza and COVID-19, people could benefit from having tools at home that correctly identify their illness.
At-home COVID-19 tests are here to stay, and at-home influenza tests may be on the way soon. Clinical laboratories could play an important role in educating the public on the correct handling of these tests.
As clinical laboratory self-testing expands, sharing of test results with healthcare providers becomes even more essential to optimize health outcomes
Survey data collected by the University of Michigan’s Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation (IHPI) indicates that consumer interest in direct-to-consumer (DTC) medical self-testing is growing. In fact, DTC testing appears to be more popular ever, even among older adults who were asked how they feel about performing clinical laboratory self-testing and specimen collecting for certain illnesses.
According Michigan Medicine’s MHealth Lab, “82% of older adults say that in the future, they would be somewhat or very interested in taking a medical test at home.”
Dark Daily has written regularly about this trend and how leaders need a strategy to serve this class of consumer. That strategy could include collecting the self-test results from consumers and keeping a complete record of consumers’ clinical laboratory test results from inpatient, outpatient, and self-test settings.
“As more companies bring these direct-to-consumer [medical] tests to market and buy ads promoting them, it’s important for healthcare providers and policymakers to understand what patients might be purchasing, what they’re doing with the results, and how that fits into the broader clinical and regulatory picture,” said research scientist Jeffrey Kullgren, MD (above), Associate Professor of Internal Medicine and Health Management and Policy at the University of Michigan in a press release. Clinical laboratories may find opportunities to support patients’ self-testing in tandem with the physicians who treat them. (Photo copyright: University of Michigan.)
Importance of Sharing Clinical Laboratory Self-Test Results
Individuals responding to the poll were asked only about medical laboratory self-tests they had purchased themselves either online or at a retail store. Tests provided to respondents by a healthcare provider or given to them for free were not part of the survey.
The researchers discovered that 48% of respondents had purchased at least one variety of at-home health tests in the past. The types of tests bought included:
Tests for infections other than COVID-19, such as urinary tract infections or HIV (4%), and
Other types of at-home tests, including those for allergies and food sensitivities (10%).
Approximately 82% of the respondents said they would be somewhat or very interested in taking at-home medical tests and nine out of 10 believed the test results should be shared with their doctors. But only 55% of respondents who had taken an at-home medical test and received positive results for infection other than COVID-19 had shared those results with their primary care physician.
However, 90% of respondents who had purchased a self-test for cancer screening did provide their doctors with the results.
“As we have seen in COVID-19, it’s important to share results from a home test with a provider so that it can be used to guide your care and be counted in official statistics,” said Jeffrey Kullgren, MD, Associate Professor of Internal Medicine and Health Management and Policy at the University of Michigan in an IHPI press release. Kullgren, a primary care physician and healthcare researcher at Michigan Medicine and the VA Ann Arbor Healthcare System, directed the IHPI poll.
Not All Medical Self-Tests Are Regulated by the FDA
The most prominent reason for wanting to use at-home tests was convenience and 59% of those surveyed felt that the results could be trusted.
The poll also found that 53% of older adults believe at-home medical tests are regulated by the federal government, which isn’t always the case. Many at-home medical tests are reviewed by the federal US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), but not all such tests receive full FDA review.
The FDA, however, offers an online, searchable database consumers can use to determine if a certain over-the-counter test is regulated by the FDA.
“Home tests can be a convenient way for older adults to check if they have an illness, such as COVID-19” stated Indira Venkat, Senior Vice President, AARP Research in the press release. “But consumers should make sure they know whether the test they are taking is FDA-approved, and how their health or genetic information might be shared.”
Other interesting outcomes of the research include:
The purchasing of at-home COVID-19 tests was highest among those between the ages of 50 and 64 when compared to the 65 to 80 age group, but there were no age differences for other types of at-home tests.
Respondents who are married or have who more education and/or higher household incomes were more likely to have purchased at-home tests.
Blacks were less likely to buy at-home medical tests than Whites or Hispanics.
Interest for at-home tests was higher among women than men.
Advertising swayed 44% of purchasing respondents to buy a DNA test and 11% to buy a cancer screening test.
Are DTC Home Tests as Accurate as Clinical Laboratory Testing?
At-home medical self-testing and sample collection is becoming accepted and established with consumers and the medical community, which is drawing attention to the accuracy of these tests and how clinical laboratories are being affected by the trend.
The findings of this recent survey of older consumers is just the latest evidence that at-home self-testing for everything from COVID to cancer is here to stay. Clinical laboratories should be looking for ways to serve this patient population and the physicians who treat them.
