Abstract
The promise of personalized medicine depends on the ability to integrate genetic sequencing information into disease risk assessment for individuals. As genomic sequencing technology enters the realm of clinical care, its scale necessitates answers to key social and behavioral research questions about the complexities of understanding, communicating, and ultimately using sequence information to improve health. Our study captured the motivations and expectations of research participants who consented to participate in a research protocol, ClinSeq, which offers to return a subset of the data generated through high-throughput sequencing. We present findings from an exploratory study of 322 participants, most of whom identified themselves as white, non-Hispanic, and coming from higher socio-economic groups. Participants aged 45–65 years answered open-ended questions about the reasons they consented to ClinSeq and about what they anticipated would come of genomic sequencing. Two main reasons for participating were as follows: a conviction to altruism in promoting research, and a desire to learn more about genetic factors that contribute to one's own health risk. Overall, participants expected genomic research to help improve understanding of disease causes and treatments. Our findings offer a first glimpse into the motivations and expectations of individuals seeking their own genomic information, and provide initial insights into the value these early adopters of technology place on information generated by high-throughput sequencing studies.
Similar content being viewed by others
Log in or create a free account to read this content
Gain free access to this article, as well as selected content from this journal and more on nature.com
or
References
Morton NE : The detection and estimation of linkage between the genes for elliptocytosis and the Rh blood type. Am J Hum Genet 1956; 8: 80–96.
Morton NE : The mutational load due to detrimental genes in man. Am J Hum Genet 1960; 12: 348–364.
Charron P, Arad M, Arbustini E et al: Genetic counselling and testing in cardiomyopathies: a position statement of the European Society of Cardiology Working Group on Myocardial and Pericardial Diseases. Eur Heart J 2010; 31: 2715–2726.
Adams PC, Reboussin DM, Barton JC et al: Hemochromatosis and iron-overload screening in a racially diverse population. N Engl J Med 2005; 352: 1769–1778.
Murphy J, Scott J, Kaufman D, Geller G, LeRoy L, Hudson K : Public perspectives on informed consent for biobanking. Am J Public Health 2009; 99: 2128–2134.
Biesecker LG, Mullikin JC, Facio FM et al: The ClinSeq Project: piloting large-scale genome sequencing for research in genomic medicine. Genome Res 2009; 19: 1665–1674.
van Gelderen CE, Savelkoul TJ, van Dokkum W, Meulenbelt J : Motives and perception of healthy volunteers who participate in experiments. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1993; 45: 15–21.
Almeida L, Azevedo B, Nunes T, Vaz-da-Silva M, Soares-da-Silva P : Why healthy subjects volunteer for phase I studies and how they perceive their participation? Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2007; 63: 1085–1094.
McCarty CA, Nair A, Austin DM, Giampietro PF : Informed consent and subject motivation to participate in a large, population-based genomics study: the Marshfield Clinic Personalized Medicine Research Project. Community Genet 2007; 10: 2–9.
Treloar SA, Morley KI, Taylor SD, Hall WD : Why do they do it? A pilot study towards understanding participant motivation and experience in a large genetic epidemiological study of endometriosis. Community Genet 2007; 10: 61–71.
Nurgat ZA, Craig W, Campbell NC, Bissett JD, Cassidy J, Nicolson MC : Patient motivations surrounding participation in phase I and phase II clinical trials of cancer chemotherapy. Br J Cancer 2005; 92: 1001–1005.
Schutta KM, Burnett CB : Factors that influence a patient's decision to participate in a phase I cancer clinical trial. Oncol Nurs Forum 2000; 27: 1435–1438.
Moore S : A need to try everything: patient participation in phase I trials. J Adv Nurs 2001; 33: 738–747.
Henderson GE, Easter MM, Zimmer C et al: Therapeutic misconception in early phase gene transfer trials. Soc Sci Med 2006; 62: 239–253.
Sulmasy DP, Astrow AB, He MK et al: The culture of faith and hope: patients’ justifications for their high estimations of expected therapeutic benefit when enrolling in early phase oncology trials. Cancer 2010; 116: 3702–3711.
Gelijns A : Lessons for genomics from other technologies; in: Diffusion and use of Genomic Innovations in Health and Medicine: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: National Academies Press, 2008, p 17.
Rogers EM : Diffusion of Innovations, 5th eds New York: Free Press, 2003.
Ashley EA, Butte AJ, Wheeler MT et al: Clinical assessment incorporating a personal genome. Lancet 2010; 375: 1525–1535.
Armstrong K, Weiner J, Weber B, Asch DA : Early adoption of BRCA1/2 testing: who and why. Genet Med 2003; 5: 92–98.
Hobbs P, Smith A, George WD, Sellwood RA : Acceptors and rejectors of an invitation to undergo breast screening compared with those who referred themselves. J Epidemiol Community Health 1980; 34: 19–22.
Manne SL, Chung DC, Weinberg DS et al: Knowledge and attitudes about microsatellite instability testing among high-risk individuals diagnosed with colorectal cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2007; 16: 2110–2117.
Esplen MJ, Madlensky L, Aronson M et al: Colorectal cancer survivors undergoing genetic testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivational factors and psychosocial functioning. Clin Genet 2007; 72: 394–401.
Sankar P, Wolpe PR, Jones NL, Cho M : How do women decide? Accepting or declining BRCA1/2 testing in a nationwide clinical sample in the United States. Community Genet 2006; 9: 78–86.
Balmana J, Stoffel EM, Emmons KM, Garber JE, Syngal S : Comparison of motivations and concerns for genetic testing in hereditary colorectal and breast cancer syndromes. J Med Genet 2004; 41: e44.
Gooding HC, Linnenbringer EL, Burack J, Roberts JS, Green RC, Biesecker BB : Genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer disease: motivation to obtain information and control as precursors to coping with increased risk. Patient Educ Couns 2006; 64: 259–267.
Claes E, Denayer L, Evers-Kiebooms G, Boogaerts A, Legius E : Predictive testing for hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer: motivation, illness representations and short-term psychological impact. Patient Educ Couns 2004; 55: 265–274.
Hurley AC, Harvey FR, Roberts JS et al: Genetic susceptibility for Alzheimer's disease: why did adult offspring seek testing? Am J Alzheimers Dis Other Demen 2005; 20: 374–381.
Esplen MJ, Madlensky L, Butler K et al: Motivations and psychosocial impact of genetic testing for HNPCC. Am J Med Genet 2001; 103: 9–15.
Roberts JS, LaRusse SA, Katzen H et al: Reasons for seeking genetic susceptibility testing among first-degree relatives of people with Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2003; 17: 86–93.
Fraser L, Bramald S, Chapman C et al: What motivates interest in attending a familial cancer genetics clinic? Fam Cancer 2003; 2: 159–168.
Ormond KE, Wheeler MT, Hudgins L et al: Challenges in the clinical application of whole-genome sequencing. Lancet 2010; 375: 1749–1751.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by funding from the Intramural Research Program of the National Human Genome Research Institute. We thank Riley Cooper-McCann and Haley Eidem for providing assistance in compiling the data. Most importantly, we thank the study participants.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Facio, F., Brooks, S., Loewenstein, J. et al. Motivators for participation in a whole-genome sequencing study: implications for translational genomics research. Eur J Hum Genet 19, 1213–1217 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2011.123
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2011.123
Keywords
This article is cited by
-
Evaluation of CTRL: a web application for dynamic consent and engagement with individuals involved in a cardiovascular genetic disorders cohort
European Journal of Human Genetics (2024)
-
Lessons learned during the process of reporting individual genomic results to participants of a population-based biobank
European Journal of Human Genetics (2023)
-
Parents, their children, whole exome sequencing and unsolicited findings: growing towards the child’s future autonomy
European Journal of Human Genetics (2021)
-
Patients’ decision to contribute to a biobank in the light of the patient-recruiter relationship—a qualitative study of broad consent in a hospital setting
Journal of Community Genetics (2021)
-
Just data? Solidarity and justice in data-driven medicine
Life Sciences, Society and Policy (2020)
