Are commercial genetic injury tests premature?
- PMID: 37243491
- DOI: 10.1111/sms.14406
Are commercial genetic injury tests premature?
Abstract
Introduction: Several direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing companies have emerged that claim to be able to test for susceptibility for musculoskeletal injuries. Although there are several publications on the emergence of this industry, none have critically evaluated the evidence for the use of genetic polymorphisms in commercial tests. The aim of this review was to identify, where possible, the polymorphisms and to evaluate the current scientific evidence for their inclusion.
Results: The most common polymorphisms included COL1A1 rs1800012, COL5A1 rs12722, and GDF5 rs143383. The current evidence suggests that it is premature or even not viable to include these three polymorphisms as markers of injury risk. A unique set of injury-specific polymorphisms, which do not include COL1A1, COL5A1, or GDF5, identified from genome-wide association studies (GWAS) is used by one company in their tests for 13 sports injuries. However, of the 39 reviewed polymorphisms, 22 effective alleles are rare and absent in African, American, and/or Asian populations. Even when informative in all populations, the sensitivity of many of the genetic markers was low and/or has not been independently validated in follow-up studies.
Conclusions: The current evidence suggests it is premature to include any of the reviewed polymorphisms identified by GWAS or candidate gene approaches in commercial genetic tests. The association of MMP7 rs1937810 with Achilles tendon injuries, and SAP30BP rs820218 and GLCCI1 rs4725069 with rotator cuff injuries does warrant further investigation. Based on current evidence, it remains premature to market any commercial genetic test to determine susceptibility to musculoskeletal injuries.
Keywords: COL1A1; COL5A1; GDF5; GWAS; direct-to-consumer (DTC) genetic testing; musculoskeletal injuries.
© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
References
REFERENCES
-
- Ribbans WJ, September AV, Collins M. Tendon and ligament genetics: how do they contribute to disease and injury? A narrative review. Life. 2022;12(5):663. doi:10.3390/life12050663
-
- Williams AG, Wackerhage H, Day SH. Genetic testing for sports performance, responses to training and injury risk: practical and ethical considerations. Med Sport Sci. 2016;61:105-119. doi:10.1159/000445244
-
- Vlahovich N, Hughes DC, Griffiths LR, et al. Genetic testing for exercise prescription and injury prevention: AIS-Athlome consortium-FIMS joint statement. BMC Genomics. 2017;18(Suppl 8):818. doi:10.1186/s12864-017-4185-5
-
- Webborn N, Williams A, McNamee M, et al. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing for predicting sports performance and talent identification: consensus statement. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(23):1486-1491. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2015-095343
-
- Goodlin GT, Roos TR, Roos AK, Kim SK. The dawning age of genetic testing for sports injuries. Clin J Sport Med. 2015;25(1):1-5. doi:10.1097/JSM.0000000000000158
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous
