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
Review
. 2019 Feb 27;14(1):4.
doi: 10.1186/s13010-019-0073-8.

Potential use of clinical polygenic risk scores in psychiatry - ethical implications and communicating high polygenic risk

Affiliations
Review

Potential use of clinical polygenic risk scores in psychiatry - ethical implications and communicating high polygenic risk

A C Palk et al. Philos Ethics Humanit Med. .

Abstract

Psychiatric disorders present distinct clinical challenges which are partly attributable to their multifactorial aetiology and the absence of laboratory tests that can be used to confirm diagnosis or predict risk. Psychiatric disorders are highly heritable, but also polygenic, with genetic risk conferred by interactions between thousands of variants of small effect that can be summarized in a polygenic risk score. We discuss four areas in which the use of polygenic risk scores in psychiatric research and clinical contexts could have ethical implications. First, there is concern that clinical use of polygenic risk scores may exacerbate existing health inequities. Second, research findings regarding polygenic risk could be misinterpreted in stigmatising or discriminatory ways. Third, there are concerns associated with testing minors as well as eugenics concerns elicited by prenatal polygenic risk testing. Fourth, potential challenges that could arise with the feedback and interpretation of high polygenic risk for a psychiatric disorder would require consideration. While there would be extensive overlap with the challenges of feeding back genetic findings in general, the potential clinical use of polygenic risk scoring warrants discussion in its own right, given the recency of this possibility. To this end, we discuss how lay interpretations of risk and genetic information could intersect. Consideration of these factors would be necessary for ensuring effective and constructive communication and interpretation of polygenic risk information which, in turn, could have implications for the uptake of any therapeutic recommendations. Recent advances in polygenic risk scoring have major implications for its clinical potential, however, care should be taken to ensure that communication of polygenic risk does not feed into problematic assumptions regarding mental disorders or support reductive interpretations.

Keywords: Bioethics; Complex risk; Ethics; Polygenic risk score; Psychiatric genetic risk; Risk communication; Risk interpretation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable

Consent for publication

Not applicable

Competing interests

In the past 3 years DJS has received research grants and/or consultancy honoraria from Biocodex, Lundbeck, Servier, and Sun. The other authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

    1. Psychiatric Genomics Consortium (PGC) What is the PGC? 2018.
    1. Purcell SM, Wray NR, Stone JL, Visscher PM, O'Donovan MC, Sullivan PF, et al. Common polygenic variation contributes to risk of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Nature. 2009;460(7256):748–752. doi: 10.1038/nature08185.. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Venkatasubramanian G, Keshavan MS. Biomarkers in psychiatry - a critique. Ann Neurosci. 2016;23(1):3–5. doi: 10.1159/000443549. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. First MB, Pincus HA, Levine JB, Williams JB, Ustun B, Peele R. Clinical utility as a criterion for revising psychiatric diagnoses. Am J Psychiatry. 2004;161(6):946–954. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.161.6.946. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Venigalla H, Mekala HM, Hassan M, Ahmed R, Zain H, Dar S, et al. An update on biomarkers in psychiatric disorders – are we aware, do we use in our clinical practice? Ment Health Fam Med. 2017;13:471–479.