Storing and Testing Children’s DNA

Storing and Testing Children’s DNA

by Dr. Hsien-Hsien Lei
Posted June 20, 2007 in DNA Testing, DNA and Disease, DNA in General

chearHave you taken the current Eye on DNA poll? Should guardians decide whether children should get genetic testing? Or should children make their own decision once they’re of legal age? Readers of the Eye on DNA poll below who believe guardians hold the power are in the lead. These results mirror those from the CS Mott Children’s Hospital National Poll on Children’s Health that surveyed over 2,000 adults in the US.

  • 38% of parents would store their child’s DNA in a government biobank, the same percentage would store their own DNA
  • 54% of adults would get genetic testing for disease risk prediction even if there’s no treatment or cure
  • 39% of adults would get genetic testing only when there’s effective treatment

Lead researcher Dr. Beth Tarini:

Some adults feel that even without a treatment, genetic testing will better prepare them to deal with an illness. Others may simply hope that testing may lead to the faster development of a cure.

What do you think about genetic testing and DNA biobanks? If you haven’t taken the poll yet, it’s below the fold.

Should children be tested for genetic variations that might predispose them to chronic diseases like cancer or heart disease?
View Results

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,


goldfade-divider-custom.gif

Related Posts:
American Journal of Medical Genetics Special Issue on Children and Genetics...
DNA Direct Launches DNA Archive for Home DNA Storage...
Types of Genetic Tests...
Newborn Genetic Screening vs Right to Privacy...
Eye on DNA Headlines for 28 August 2007 and a Poll on DNA Storage...
DNA Paternity Testing Myths...
DNA Video: Sequenom Prenatal Genetic Testing...

RSS feed | Trackback URI

Please note that comments left using the form below will be publicly displayed. If you'd like to correspond with me privately, please email me at hsien@eyeondna.com.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it's probably in moderation. I will approve it as soon as I can! Thanks for your patience.

5 Comments »

Comment by NA

I think this type of question should be broken up into separate types of questions. For example, should parents have a choice for having their child tested for complex diseases only? Should parents have a choice for having their child tested for monogenic disorders only?

I think there will eventually be a policy where all major disorders and diseases (both monogenic and complex) will be screened for during pregnancy. The down fall on this is the unexpected mutation that can arise that leads a person to having a disorder or disease when the first test done (during pregnancy) showed no mutation for a certain disorder or disease.

Comment by Hsien

Yes, my poll is very primitive and simplistic. ;)
As for prenatal screening, this is from an interview of Ravegen’s Dr. Rav Dhallan I did earlier this year:

Dr. Dhallan’s vision is to identify as many such disorders as possible that can be prevented or treated easily if they’re diagnosed early enough. He believes that it’s possible to make a bigger impact if you can diagnose someone in utero since rare genetic disorders will most likely remain hidden until much later in life when the disease surfaces and it’s too late for preventive measures.

Comment by Hsien

The full interview of Dr. Dhallan from March 2007 in case anyone’s interested.

~~~~~
In Joan Rothschild’s The Dream of the Perfect Child, she looks at how prenatal testing has changed the way families experience pregnancy and public perception of disability. About three decades ago, ultrasound, amniocentesis, and other prenatal tests became a routine part of a pregnant woman’s prenatal care. Since then, parents have agonized before, during, and after the tests.

Today, we argue, women have “choice.” They need not give birth to a child with Down syndrome. Women can choose prenatal diagnosis and terminate the pregnancy if the tests are positive. But fear still motivates. Attitudes toward children with Down syndrome or other birth defects have little changed in the intervening decades. Only the ability to act and the timing of our actions have changed.

Ravgen is offering one more means of prenatal testing that is much less invasive to both the pregnant mother and her unborn child since it analyzes fetal DNA in maternal blood; only a blood draw is required. But the impact of making prenatal testing even easier than before means that more of us will be under pressure to find out all we can about our babies and to to make sure our children are as perfect as we can make them. On the other hand, it also means that parents and healthcare providers can be better prepared to handle a child with special needs once he or she is born.

Yesterday, I had the chance to talk to Ravgen Chairman and CEO Dr. Ravinder Dhallan about their technology and his vision for its use. One of the first things I asked about was a feature of Ravgen (video) that aired on WUSA Channel 9 Washington DC. In it, Ravgen staff Sarah Emche talked about the “incredible peace of mind” the test gave her family during each of her two pregnancies. That struck me as an overstatement considering all of the various congenital defects that are possible and for which no prenatal tests exist.

While Dr. Dhallan agrees, he also says that prenatal tests like Ravgen’s are just extra tools to be used in prenatal diagnosis. Genetic testing won’t ever replace technologies like ultrasound that’s capable of diagnosing structural abnormalities in the fetus. However, there is great promise for prenatal tests that can analyze specific genetic loci and mutations. The Ravgen test is currently limited to detecting Down’s syndrome in which there is an extra chromosome 21, but theoretically it could be adapted to identify other types of genetic variations as well.

For instance, if a mother knew that her child carried the p16 mutation that predisposed him to melanoma, she could perhaps be extra careful to prevent sun damage from birth*. Dr. Dhallan’s vision is to identify as many such disorders as possible that can be prevented or treated easily if they’re diagnosed early enough. He believes that it’s possible to make a bigger impact if you can diagnose someone in utero since rare genetic disorders will most likely remain hidden until much later in life when the disease surfaces and it’s too late for preventive measures.

At this point, you might be thinking about preimplantation genetic diagnosis that has been approved for a number of genetic mutations, including the BRCA genes, which increase a person’s risk of breast and ovarian cancers. Those embryos that carry the mutations being screened would be discarded in favor of those that don’t. Similarly, a prenatal test could come to the same conclusion but at a much later stage of the pregnancy. And then there is the question of when to perform such genetic tests - before a child is born or after.

So we’ve gotten to the controversy. As Rebecca Taylor of Mary Meets Dolly often reminds us, parents who choose not to have children with known genetic defects forget that in the future, treatments and cures could become available. If we focus on prenatal testing more than on the disease itself, we may never gain the momentum we need to eradicate the disease instead of the person.

The reality is prenatal tests are already available and commonplace. The hope is that with new technologies like Ravgen’s, we will reduce the risk of undergoing prenatal testing and increase their accuracy. And the better information we have, the better able we are to make good choices about our health and our lives.

*Myriad Genetics offers Melaris, a genetic test for hereditary melanoma that identifies mutations in the p16 gene.

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
Comment by NA

Yes, Dr. Dhallan’s hit it on the head. The guy is brilliant! Can you please provide a contact email so I can get in touch with Dr. Dhallan’s? You can send his email, or work of employment - I can do the searching from there- to my informal email addy: p53mehrproject@yahoo.com

Thank you!

(Comments wont nest below this level)
 
 
 

[...] for BRCA1/2 be permitted for minors? Opinions of BRCA mutation carriers and their adult offspring (Eye on DNA, press [...]

 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Note: Posting will be sporadic while I'm on maternity leave.


Search Eye on DNA


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


ARCHIVE


RANDOMIZED BLOGROLL


We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health
information:
verify here.
Eye on DNA is not a substitute for medical advice. Always ask your healthcare provider or genetic counselor for information specific to you.

Mendel's Garden

Healthcare 100 - eDrugSearch.com



View Hsien-Hsien Lei, PhD's profile on LinkedIn

Bloggers' Rights at EFF