Aug 16, 2017 | Instruments & Equipment, Laboratory Instruments & Laboratory Equipment, Laboratory News, Laboratory Operations, Laboratory Pathology
Undergoing genetic testing also can impact the cost and availability of life insurance in Australia, not just for the person who underwent the testing, but for their families as well
Concerns about direct-to-consumer genetic testing have led to stricter regulatory requirements for Clinical laboratories that perform genetic tests in Australia.
Starting in July 2017, medical laboratories that perform genetic testing must have accreditation by the National Association of Testing Authorities (NATA). And their tests must meet performance standards established by the National Pathology Accreditation Advisory Council. Manufacturers must also obtain a conformity assessment certificate from the Therapeutic Goods Administration, the organization that regulates medical devices, medicines, blood, and tissue in Australia.
According to the Australian Law Reform Commission (ALRC), there are currently 220 deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) diagnostic tests available in Australia. There are 44 different laboratories located throughout the country that perform those tests. A database of the available tests and labs is maintained by the Human Genetics Society of Australasia (HGSA).
However, Australian citizens are not limited to just the tests and labs listed by the HGSA. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing kits, which are marketed through retail outlets, mail order, and the Internet, also can be used to obtain genetic information. However, receipt of genetic test results can be problematic and have negative consequences, say some experts.
Genetic Tests Can Cause Confusion; Affect Insurance
A recent paper, authored by researchers at Monash University, outlined apprehension about home genetic testing and how it can have a negative impact on people’s lives and insurance rates. The authors claim the tests can be misleading, noting concerns that the results are often interpreted by people who lack proper training. They cautioned that providers in other countries are not subject to the strict laws that govern genetic testing in Australia. Monash University is Australia’s largest university with facilities and campuses in Australia, Malaysia, South Africa, China, India, and Italy.
“In the age of individuality and consumer empowerment, some people want to take things into their own hands, but that’s not without its risks,” stated Ken Harvey, MBBS (Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery), in a Special Broadcast Service (SBS) article. Dr. Harvey is an FRCPA (Pathologist) and Associate Professor in the Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine at Monash University, and one of the authors of the paper. “If you’re getting something over the internet it can be really difficult to assess whether that test has been accredited by a reputable independent authority.”
The chart above tracks the collective annual test volume of just three direct-to-consumer (DTC) providers of genetic test in the US. It illustrates the steep rise in DTC genetic test usage among US-based healthcare consumers. Clinical laboratories could chart a similar progression tracking the increase in DTC genetic testing they have performed in just the past few years. (Image copyright: University of Iowa Wiki.)
In addition, the results of home genetic tests have to be translated and explained to consumers by a medical professional, often a General Practitioner (GP), which, according to the Australian researchers, can lead to confusion.
“Though the results would go back to the GPs, many GPs really had no idea what to do with these results when they got them”, Harvey noted in the SBS article. “I’ve had GPs tell me one of their patients comes in clutching a handful of printouts about their genetic tests, and they say, ‘what am I meant to do with this?’”
Why Genetic Testing is Important
One person who understands the urge to try genetic testing is Heather Renton, Founder and President of Syndromes Without a Name (SWAN) Australia, a not-for-profit incorporated association and charity that works to increase awareness and understanding of the impact and prevalence of undiagnosed genetic conditions.
After being misdiagnosed multiple times, it was discovered that Renton’s daughter had the rare FOXP1 gene. Individuals with the FOXP1 genetic disorder have delayed speech and learning issues, sometimes with signs of autism. Symptoms of the condition include:
- Speech and learning disabilities;
- Immune system issues; and
- Behavioral abnormalities.
“People are sometimes so desperate for answers, [but] who’s to know that it’s credible—you might think you’ve got this gene and it might turn out that you don’t,” Renton stated in the SBS article.
“You might have a gene susceptible to breast cancer the older you get, but as a 20-year-old you have no idea you’ve got that,” she continued. “Life’s a lottery game.”
Why Genetic Testing Can Cause Problems
Nevertheless, some individuals may not welcome the results that genetic testing could reveal.
“If you get one of these batteries of genetic tests, the implication is these are genetic conditions that can be inherited; the results are not just important or significant to you, but to your family members, your children, etc.,” Harvey stressed. “The implications go beyond a particular person—and not everyone wants to know.”
“For some families, it’s been life shattering to find out they’ve actually passed this condition on to their child, and they carry this guilt,” Renton added.
Genetic Test Results Can Affect Insurance Premiums/Availability
Results of genetic tests also could affect the costs and availability of life insurance policies in Australia that went into effect after July.
Under the Insurance Contracts Act, Australians applying for life insurance are required to disclose:
- Their medical history;
- Information about the health of first degree relatives (parents, siblings, and children); and
- The known results of any genetic testing.
Life insurance policies in Australia are guaranteed renewable. This means consumers do not have to inform insurers of changes in their medical conditions after policies have been issued. It is forbidden for insurers to demand that consumers have any genetic testing performed. However, if a consumer has had a genetic test performed and knows the results before the policy is issued, those results must be divulged to the insurer. That information can then be used to determine policy rates or deny coverage.
Could This Happen In the US?
In the United States, some genetic testing is regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the processes that oversee medical devices. The FDA has proposed regulating laboratory-developed tests (LDTs), which would bring more genetic testing under the agency’s scrutiny. As direct-to-consumer genetic testing becomes more advanced and is marketed to the public, it is probable that regulatory oversight of labs performing these tests also will increase in an effort to protect the public. Thus, clinical laboratories and pathology groups are advised to monitor this situation in Australia. Similar regulatory actions could be taken in the US as well.
—JP Schlingman
Related Information:
‘Not Everyone Wants to Know’: Warnings Over Genetic Tests
Warning Over Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Tests
Retail Genetics
Growth in DTC Genetic Testing
Thinking About Life Insurance Through a Genetic Lens
Life Insurance Products and Genetic Testing in Australia
British Health Authorities Criticize Medical Laboratory Tests for Consumers
Medical Laboratory Tests for Consumers Under Investigation on Two Continents
Aug 4, 2017 | Digital Pathology, Instruments & Equipment, Laboratory Instruments & Laboratory Equipment, Laboratory Management and Operations, Laboratory News, Laboratory Operations, Laboratory Pathology, Laboratory Testing
SHERLOCK makes accurate, fast diagnoses for about 61-cents per test with no refrigeration needed; could give medical laboratories a new diagnostic tool
Genetics researchers have been riveted by ongoing discoveries related to Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR) for some time now and so have anatomic pathology laboratories. The diagnostic possibilities inherent in CRISPR have been established, and now, a new diagnostic tool that works with CRISPR is set to change clinical laboratory diagnostics in a foundational way.
The tool is called SHERLOCK, which stands for (Specific High-sensitivity Enzymatic Reporter unLOCKing). And it is causing excitement in the scientific community for several reasons:
- It can detect pathogens in extremely small amounts of genetic matter;
- Tests can be performed using urine and/or saliva rather than blood;
- The tests are extremely sensitive; and they
- Cost far less than the diagnostic tests currently in use.
In an article published in Science, researchers described SHERLOCK tests that can distinguish between strains of Zika and Dengue fever, as well as determining the difference between mutations in cell-free tumor DNA.
How SHERLOCK and CRISPR Differ and Why That’s Important
Scientists have long suspected that CRISPR could be used to detect viruses. However, far more attention has been given to the its genome editing capabilities. And, there are significant differences between how CRISPR and SHERLOCK work. According to the Science article, when CRISPR is used to edit genes, a small strip of RNA directs an enzyme capable of cutting DNA to a precise location within a genome. The enzyme that CRISPR uses is called Cas9 (CRISPR associated protein 9). It works like scissors, snipping the strand of DNA, so that it is either damaged or replaced by a healthy, new sequence.
SHERLOCK, however, uses a different enzyme—Cas13a (originally dubbed C2c2 by the researchers who discovered it). Cas13a goes to RNA, rather than DNA, and once it starts cutting, it doesn’t stop. It chops through any RNA it encounters. The researchers who developed SHERLOCK describe these cuts as “collateral cleavage.” According to an article published by STAT, “All that chopping generates a fluorescent signal that can be detected with a $200 device or, sometimes, with the naked eye.”
The screenshot above is from a video in which Feng Zhang, PhD (center), a Core Member of the Broad Institute at MIT and one of the lead researchers working on SHERLOCK, and his research team, explain the difference and value SHERLOCK will make in the detection of diseases like Zika. Click on the image above to watch the video. (Video copyright: Broad Institute/MIT.)
Early Stage Detection in Clinical Laboratories
A research paper published in Science states that SHERLOCK can provide “rapid DNA or RNA detection with attomolar sensitivity and single-base mismatch specificity.” Attomolar equates to about one part per quintillion—a billion-billion. According to the article on the topic also published in Science, “The detection sensitivity of the new CRISPR-Cas13a system for specific genetic material is one million times better than the most commonly used diagnostic technique.” Such sensitivity suggests that clinical laboratories could detect pathogens at earlier stages using SHERLOCK.
The Stat article notes that, along with sensitivity, SHERLOCK has specificity. It can detect a difference of a single nucleotide, such as the difference between the African and Asian strains of Zika (for example, the African strain has been shown to cause microcephaly, whereas the Asian strain does not). Thus, the combination of sensitivity and specificity could mean that SHERLOCK would be more accurate and faster than other diagnostic tests.
Clinicians in Remote Locations Could Diagnose and Treat Illness More Quickly
Perhaps one of the most important aspects of SHERLOCK is the portability and durability of the test. It can be performed on glass fiber paper and works even after the components have been freeze dried. “We showed that this system is very stable, so you can really put it on a piece of paper and it will survive. You don’t have to refrigerate it all the times,” stated Feng Zhang, PhD, in an interview with the Washington Post. Zhang is a Core Member of the Broad Institute at MIT and was one of the scientists who developed CRISPR.
The researchers note that SHERLOCK could cost as little as 61-cents per test to perform. For clinicians working in remote locations with little or no power, such a test could improve their ability to diagnose and treatment illness in the field and possibly save lives.
“If you had something that could be used as a screening test, very inexpensively and rapidly, that would be a huge advance, particularly if it could detect an array of agents,” stated William Schaffner, MD, Professor and Chair of the Department of Preventive Medicine at Vanderbilt University Medical Center, in the Post article. Schaffner describes the Broad Institute’s research as being “very, very provocative.”
The test could radically change the delivery of care in more modern settings, as well. “It looks like one significant step on the pathway [that] is the Holy Grail, which is developing point-of-care, or bedside detection, [that] doesn’t require expensive equipment or even reliable power,” noted Scott Weaver, PhD, in an article on Big Think. Weaver is a Professor and Director at the Institute for Human Infections and Immunity University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas.
Just the Beginning
Anatomic pathologists and clinical laboratories will want to follow SHERLOCK’s development. It could be on the path to fundamentally transforming the way disease gets diagnosed in their laboratories and in the field.
According to the Post article, “The scientists have filed several US patent applications on SHERLOCK, including for uses in detecting viruses, bacteria, and cancer-causing mutations.” In addition to taking steps to secure patents on the technology, the researchers are exploring ways to commercialize their work, as well as discussing the possibility of launching a startup. However, before this technology can be used in medical laboratory testing, SHERLOCK will have to undergo the regulatory processes with various agencies, including applying for FDA approval.
—Dava Stewart
Related Information:
New CRISPR Tool Can Detect Tiny Amounts of Viruses
CRISPR Cousin SHERLOCK May Be Able to Track Down Diseases, Scientists Say
Nucleic Acid Detection with CRISPR-Cas13a/C2c2
A New CRISPR Breakthrough Could Lead to Simpler, Cheaper Disease Diagnosis
Meet CRISPR’s Younger Brother, SHERLOCK
Trends in Genomic Research That Could Impact Clinical Laboratories and Anatomic Pathology Groups Very Soon
Pathologists and Clinical Laboratories May Soon Have a Test for Identifying Cardiac Patients at Risk from Specific Heart Drugs by Studying the Patients’ Own Heart Cells
Patent Dispute over CRISPR Gene-Editing Technology May Determine Who Will Be Paid Licensing Royalties by Medical Laboratories
Jul 21, 2017 | Instruments & Equipment, Laboratory Instruments & Laboratory Equipment, Laboratory Management and Operations, Laboratory Operations, Laboratory Pathology, Laboratory Testing
Pathologists should note that this agreement is not without controversy as the question over who owns patients’ DNA information sparks warnings from legal experts
Did you ever wonder which lab does all the genetic testing for Ancestry as it offers to help consumers learn more about their family histories? Also, were you ever curious about the actual number of genetic tests that Ancestry has generated? After all, its advertisements for these genetic tests are ubiquitous.
You won’t have to wonder any longer, because Dark Daily has the answers. To the first question, it is Quest Diagnostics, Incorporated (NYSE:DGX)—one of the world’s largest clinical laboratory companies—that does the genetic sequencing on the consumer samples provided to it by Ancestry.
To the second question, the number of individual samples in the Ancestry repository and database is now four million, according to information on its website.
AncestryDNA (Ancestry) and Quest Diagnostics (Quest) now collaborate to help consumers learn about their family histories and unlock secrets in their DNA. Since August of 2016, Quest has performed the genomic testing for home DNA kits ordered through Ancestrydna.com. What impact might this have on medical laboratories that perform DNA testing for health and medical reasons?
DNA Testing Reveals Who We Truly Are
“We are very excited to be partnering with Quest Diagnostics to offer our consumer DNA test to more consumers around the world,” stated Tim Sullivan, President and CEO at Ancestry in a news release that announced the genetic testing agreement between the two companies.
To utilize the AncestryDNA service, consumers must first order a DNA kit online through the Ancestry website. The cost of the kit is $99. This includes instructions, a saliva collection tube, and a pre-paid return mailer.
DNA collection kits like the one shown above let people at home do much of the work normally performed in clinical laboratory settings. Though it’s inexpensive compared to standard DNA testing, there is controversy over privacy and ownership of the DNA information. (Photo copyright: BBC/Getty Images.)
After collecting a saliva sample, the customer sends it in for processing. Once the test is completed, an e-mail notification informs the patient that the results can be viewed on AncestryDNA’s website. Typically, a test is completed within six to eight weeks.
The DNA test uses microarray-based autosomal DNA testing, analyzing as many as 700,000 changes in an individual’s genome. These changes (or variations) are called single-nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs for short. They are useful in identifying a person’s true ethnicity and can distinguish possible relatives from among people who have previously taken the AncestryDNA test.
“Our focus is on helping consumers around the world take advantage of the latest technology and science to help them learn more about themselves, their families, and their place in the world,” stated Sullivan in another news release.
Managing One’s Health with DNA Information
As noted earlier, AncestryDNA has collected more than four-million DNA samples. Remarkably, its genetic testing service is currently available in more than 30 countries around the globe, according to Ancestry’s website.
The two companies hope to expand their relationship to include the development of applications to explore valuable medical and health information for consumers.
“People are very interested in their family history, and knowing one’s family health history is very important in helping us manage our health,” noted Stephen Rusckowski, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of Quest Diagnostics.
The actual genetic testing is being performed at Quest Diagnostics’ 200,000 square foot facility located in Marlborough, Mass. Quest Diagnostics was chosen for the collaboration after Ancestry requested proposals from several laboratory organizations.
“Adding a second diagnostic partner is a critical step forward as we work to continue to meet the consumer demand we’re seeing for our DNA tests in the US and markets around the world,” stated Ken Chahine, PhD, JD, Executive Vice President at Ancestry and professor at University of Utah S. J. Quinney College of Law in Salt Lake City, in a press release. “We’ll also now be able to move toward an East-West logistical approach, testing kits closer to where our consumers live and, ideally, reducing the time they need to wait to receive their results.”
Concerns Over Patient Privacy and DNA Ownership
Ancestry’s genetic testing program is not without its critics. There are concerns regarding privacy issues and DNA ownership for consumers who use AncestryDNA. Joel Winston, Esq. is a New York attorney who specializes in consumer protection law and commercial litigation. In an article, Winston claimed that Ancestry’s privacy policy and terms of service gave the company complete ownership and control of submitted DNA.
“There are three significant provisions in the AncestryDNA Privacy Policy and Terms of Service to consider on behalf of yourself and your genetic relatives: (1) the perpetual, royalty-free, world-wide license to use your DNA; (2) the warning that DNA information may be used against “you or a genetic relative”; (3) your waiver of legal rights,” Winston wrote.
He claims that Ancestry customers are relinquishing their genetic privacy when they agree to the terms online. Winston urged consumers to fully read, consider, and understand the terms before agreeing to them.
Ancestry responded to the claims by releasing updated terms and conditions for clarity regarding ownership of DNA and information sharing. The company maintains they do not claim ownership rights to DNA submitted to them for testing, and that they do not share DNA testing results with other entities and organizations without customer permission.
In an interview with BBC Radio 4, a spokesperson for Ancestry stated, “We do not share user data for research unless the user has voluntarily opted-in to that sharing.” Adding, “We always de-identify data before it’s shared with researchers, meaning the data is stripped of any information that could tie it back to its owner.”
Nevertheless, Ancestry also stated they would be removing the “perpetuity clause” in AncestryDNA’s online terms and agreements.
The controversy continues and has sparked much debate and reportage from outlets that follow trends in DNA testing and medical laboratories. One such report by the debunking site Snopes attempts to clarify the issues.
Regardless of the debate over ownership of a person’s DNA, this collaboration between Ancestry and Quest Diagnostics is an example of a company relying on diagnostic industry vendors and clinical laboratories to perform services for its customers. It illustrates the need for clinicians and laboratory professionals to remain current on industry trends in ways that might help their labs to increase profits and provide value-added services to consumers. Ancestry’s growing volume of consumer testing demonstrates that there is a potential market for medical laboratories that make themselves available to consumers to answer questions and concerns about DNA testing.
—JP Schlingman
Related Information:
Quest Diagnostics and AncestryDNA Collaborate to Expand Consumer DNA Testing
Ancestry Sets Ancestry DNA Sales Record Over Holiday Period and Fourth Quarter
Clustering of 770,000 Genomes Reveals Post-Colonial Population Structure of North America
Ancestry.com DNA Database Tops 3M, Sales Rise to $850M Ahead of Likely 2017 IPO
Ancestry.com Takes DNA Ownership Rights from Customers and Their Relatives
Setting the Record Straight: Ancestry and Your DNA
Can Ancestry.com Take Ownership of Your DNA Data?
Ancestry.com Denies Exploiting Users’ DNA
Coverage of Alexion Investigation Highlights the Risk to Clinical Laboratories That Sell Blinded Medical Data
Mar 31, 2017 | Instruments & Equipment, Laboratory Instruments & Laboratory Equipment, Laboratory Management and Operations, Laboratory News, Laboratory Operations, Laboratory Pathology
This year, one of IBM’s closely-watched picks of the technologies most likely to have the greatest impact on society is the medical lab-on-a-chip
Clinical laboratory testing and diagnostics are one of the five technologies included in IBM’s 2017 list of the technologies it predicts will have the greatest impact on society during the next five years. Of equal interest to medical laboratory professionals is that several of the other technologies included in IBM’s list have the potential be used in medical laboratories and anatomic pathology groups.
IBM Research, corporate research laboratory for parent company IBM (NYSE:IBM), has more than 3,000 researchers working in 12 labs on six continents. Each year the lab releases a list of five technologies it forecasts will have the greatest influence on how our bodies, minds, society, and the planet, develop over the next five years. The list is called “5-in-5” and has been released annually for the past 10 years by the tech giant. (more…)
Feb 13, 2017 | Digital Pathology, Instruments & Equipment, Laboratory Instruments & Laboratory Equipment, Laboratory Management and Operations, Laboratory News, Laboratory Operations, Laboratory Pathology
Innovative technological advances could potentially provide clinical laboratories, pathology groups, and medical researchers with improved methodologies for designing, performing, and analyzing lab tests that use genetic information
Researchers at the University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin) have developed an innovative new enzyme that promises to improve the methods and tools used by pathology groups and clinical laboratories when conducting genetic testing.
The enzyme enables the reproduction of large quantities of Ribonucleic acid (RNA) to be accurately duplicated. It also can perform reverse transcription and scrutinize itself while copying genetic information, which will enable both researchers and clinical laboratories to improve the accuracy of gene sequencing where RNA is involved.
The team published their findings in Science, the academic journal of The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and filed for a provisional patent for the new sequence of the discovered enzyme. (more…)
