Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2008 Mar;82(3):593-9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2007.12.020.

A critical appraisal of the scientific basis of commercial genomic profiles used to assess health risks and personalize health interventions

A Cecile J W Janssens  1 , Marta Gwinn, Linda A Bradley, Ben A Oostra, Cornelia M van Duijn, Muin J Khoury
Affiliations

A critical appraisal of the scientific basis of commercial genomic profiles used to assess health risks and personalize health interventions

A Cecile J W Janssens et al. Am J Hum Genet. 2008 Mar.

Abstract

Predictive genomic profiling used to produce personalized nutrition and other lifestyle health recommendations is currently offered directly to consumers. By examining previous meta-analyses and HuGE reviews, we assessed the scientific evidence supporting the purported gene-disease associations for genes included in genomic profiles offered online. We identified seven companies that offer predictive genomic profiling. We searched PubMed for meta-analyses and HuGE reviews of studies of gene-disease associations published from 2000 through June 2007 in which the genotypes of people with a disease were compared with those of a healthy or general-population control group. The seven companies tested at least 69 different polymorphisms in 56 genes. Of the 56 genes tested, 24 (43%) were not reviewed in meta-analyses. For the remaining 32 genes, we found 260 meta-analyses that examined 160 unique polymorphism-disease associations, of which only 60 (38%) were found to be statistically significant. Even the 60 significant associations, which involved 29 different polymorphisms and 28 different diseases, were generally modest, with synthetic odds ratios ranging from 0.54 to 0.88 for protective variants and from 1.04 to 3.2 for risk variants. Furthermore, genes in cardiogenomic profiles were more frequently associated with noncardiovascular diseases than with cardiovascular diseases, and though two of the five genes of the osteogenomic profiles did show significant associations with disease, the associations were not with bone diseases. There is insufficient scientific evidence to conclude that genomic profiles are useful in measuring genetic risk for common diseases or in developing personalized diet and lifestyle recommendations for disease prevention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow Chart of Selection of Meta-Analyses
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

  • Personalized genetics: a responsible approach.
    Stephan D, Agus D, Nierenberg M, Silver E. Stephan D, et al. Am J Hum Genet. 2008 Jul;83(1):130; author reply 131. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.06.002. Am J Hum Genet. 2008. PMID: 18606304 Free PMC article. No abstract available.

Similar articles

  • Personalized genetics: a responsible approach.
    Stephan D, Agus D, Nierenberg M, Silver E. Stephan D, et al. Am J Hum Genet. 2008 Jul;83(1):130; author reply 131. doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2008.06.002. Am J Hum Genet. 2008. PMID: 18606304 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
  • Genes, mutations, and human inherited disease at the dawn of the age of personalized genomics.
    Cooper DN, Chen JM, Ball EV, Howells K, Mort M, Phillips AD, Chuzhanova N, Krawczak M, Kehrer-Sawatzki H, Stenson PD. Cooper DN, et al. Hum Mutat. 2010 Jun;31(6):631-55. doi: 10.1002/humu.21260. Hum Mutat. 2010. PMID: 20506564 Review.
  • The future of Cochrane Neonatal.
    Soll RF, Ovelman C, McGuire W. Soll RF, et al. Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
  • Insights into genetics, human biology and disease gleaned from family based genomic studies.
    Posey JE, O'Donnell-Luria AH, Chong JX, Harel T, Jhangiani SN, Coban Akdemir ZH, Buyske S, Pehlivan D, Carvalho CMB, Baxter S, Sobreira N, Liu P, Wu N, Rosenfeld JA, Kumar S, Avramopoulos D, White JJ, Doheny KF, Witmer PD, Boehm C, Sutton VR, Muzny DM, Boerwinkle E, Günel M, Nickerson DA, Mane S, MacArthur DG, Gibbs RA, Hamosh A, Lifton RP, Matise TC, Rehm HL, Gerstein M, Bamshad MJ, Valle D, Lupski JR; Centers for Mendelian Genomics. Posey JE, et al. Genet Med. 2019 Apr;21(4):798-812. doi: 10.1038/s41436-018-0408-7. Epub 2019 Jan 18. Genet Med. 2019. PMID: 30655598 Free PMC article. Review.
  • Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: does genomic profiling to assess type 2 diabetes risk improve health outcomes?
    Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group; Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group. Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Working Group, et al. Genet Med. 2013 Aug;15(8):612-7. doi: 10.1038/gim.2013.9. Epub 2013 Mar 14. Genet Med. 2013. PMID: 23492873
See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Collins F.S., McKusick V.A. Implications of the Human Genome Project for medical science. JAMA. 2001;285:540–544. - PubMed
    1. Wallace H. GeneWatch UK; Buxton, UK: 2006. Your Diet Tailored to Your Genes: Preventing Diseases or Misleading Marketing?
    1. Hudson K., Javitt G., Burke W., Byers P., ASHG Social Issues Committee ASHG Statement on Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing in the United States. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 2007;81:635–637. - PubMed
    1. Vineis P., Christiani D.C. Genetic testing for sale. Epidemiology. 2004;15:3–5. - PubMed
    1. Government Accountability Office. (2006). Nutrigenetic testing: Tests purchased from four Web sites mislead consumers. (http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06977t.pdf)

Publication types