Cargando…

Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions

The Internet currently enables unprecedented ease of access for direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, with saliva collection kits posted directly to consumer homes from anywhere in the world. This poses new challenges for local jurisdictions in regulating genetic testing, traditionally a tightly...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Tiller, Jane, Lacaze, Paul
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5818403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29497607
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00024
_version_ 1783301010272288768
author Tiller, Jane
Lacaze, Paul
author_facet Tiller, Jane
Lacaze, Paul
author_sort Tiller, Jane
collection PubMed
description The Internet currently enables unprecedented ease of access for direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, with saliva collection kits posted directly to consumer homes from anywhere in the world. This poses new challenges for local jurisdictions in regulating genetic testing, traditionally a tightly-regulated industry. Some Internet-based genetic tests have the capacity to cause significant confusion or harm to consumers who are unaware of the risks or potential variability in quality. The emergence of some online products of questionable content, unsupported by adequate scientific evidence, is a cause for concern. Proliferation of such products in the absence of regulation has the potential to damage public trust in accredited and established clinical genetic testing during a critical period of evidence generation for genomics. Here, we explore the challenges arising from the emergence of Internet-based DTC genetic testing. In particular, there are challenges in regulating unaccredited or potentially harmful Internet-based DTC genetic testing products. In Australia, challenges exist for the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which oversees regulation of the genetic testing sector. Concerns and challenges faced in Australia are likely to reflect those of other comparable non-US jurisdictions. Here, we summarize current Australian regulation, highlight concerns, and offer recommendations on how Australia and other comparable jurisdictions might be more proactive in addressing this emerging public health issue.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5818403
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58184032018-03-01 Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions Tiller, Jane Lacaze, Paul Front Public Health Public Health The Internet currently enables unprecedented ease of access for direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing, with saliva collection kits posted directly to consumer homes from anywhere in the world. This poses new challenges for local jurisdictions in regulating genetic testing, traditionally a tightly-regulated industry. Some Internet-based genetic tests have the capacity to cause significant confusion or harm to consumers who are unaware of the risks or potential variability in quality. The emergence of some online products of questionable content, unsupported by adequate scientific evidence, is a cause for concern. Proliferation of such products in the absence of regulation has the potential to damage public trust in accredited and established clinical genetic testing during a critical period of evidence generation for genomics. Here, we explore the challenges arising from the emergence of Internet-based DTC genetic testing. In particular, there are challenges in regulating unaccredited or potentially harmful Internet-based DTC genetic testing products. In Australia, challenges exist for the Therapeutic Goods Administration, which oversees regulation of the genetic testing sector. Concerns and challenges faced in Australia are likely to reflect those of other comparable non-US jurisdictions. Here, we summarize current Australian regulation, highlight concerns, and offer recommendations on how Australia and other comparable jurisdictions might be more proactive in addressing this emerging public health issue. Frontiers Media S.A. 2018-02-15 /pmc/articles/PMC5818403/ /pubmed/29497607 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00024 Text en Copyright © 2018 Tiller and Lacaze. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Public Health
Tiller, Jane
Lacaze, Paul
Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions
title Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions
title_full Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions
title_fullStr Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions
title_full_unstemmed Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions
title_short Regulation of Internet-based Genetic Testing: Challenges for Australia and Other Jurisdictions
title_sort regulation of internet-based genetic testing: challenges for australia and other jurisdictions
topic Public Health
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5818403/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29497607
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2018.00024
work_keys_str_mv AT tillerjane regulationofinternetbasedgenetictestingchallengesforaustraliaandotherjurisdictions
AT lacazepaul regulationofinternetbasedgenetictestingchallengesforaustraliaandotherjurisdictions