Patients’ perceptions and considerations regarding DNA testing in a memory clinic: DNA‐ABOARD

Abstract Background Data‐driven criteria for DNA testing were implemented in routine care of Alzheimer Center Amsterdam. We aimed to explore patients’ perspectives and considerations regarding their decision to (not) be tested for a monogenic cause of their disease. Methods In this mixed method study, 150 of 519 new patients visiting Alzheimer Center Amsterdam who fulfilled the criteria were offered DNA‐diagnostics: 86(57%) accepted, 64(43%) did not. In 65/86(76%) cases results were negative, in 14/86(16%) a monogenic cause and in 7/86 (8%) variants of uncertain significance were found ( Figure 1) . Sex, age, education, family history of dementia, MMSE and diagnosis were retrieved. Before discussing DNA testing, patients completed a questionnaire assessing perceived risk of a genetic cause, susceptibility for, severity of, and experience with dementia, social support, coping strategies, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. Differences between those who did and did not consent to DNA testing were calculated using Pearson’s χ², Mann‐Whitney U or Independent Samples t‐tests; p‐values were FDR‐adjusted. A subset of 22 patients and/or relatives participated in semi‐structured interviews on motivations and considerations regarding their decision. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed inductively using MAXQDA‐software. Results Participants (n = 150) were 46% female and aged 61±8 (MMSE = 22±6, 5 Subjective Cognitive Decline, 9 MCI, 104 dementia [69 AD, 13 FTD, 22 other], 32 other/undetermined). Adjusted for multiple testing, no demographic, medical or psychosocial factors were associated with the decision on DNA testing (all p >0.05). Twenty‐one interviewees who agreed to DNA testing were generally motivated by obtaining information on heredity for their relatives, contributing to scientific research into a treatment, and gaining insight in the cause of their disease. One patient had blood stored, allowing their children to test it when opportune. The majority decided quickly, mostly on intuitions (e.g., responsibility towards relatives) rather than facts (e.g., information on risk and consequences). They expected to feel reassured or relieved by negative test results, and sad or worried if a genetic cause was found. Conclusions Over half of memory clinic patients eligible for DNA‐testing wanted to be tested. This decision was unrelated to demographic, medical or psychosocial characteristics, and mostly based on intuition and considerations regarding family.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Published
2024-12-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/alz.091187
Primary Topic
Patient Dignity and Privacy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Patients’ perceptions and considerations regarding DNA testing in a memory clinic: DNA‐ABOARD

Eva C. A. Asscher, Leonie N.C. Visser, Wiesje M. van der Flier, Annelien L. Bredenoord et al.
Alzheimer s & Dementia
Patient Dignity and Privacy
article

Patients’ perceptions and considerations regarding DNA testing in a memory clinic: DNA‐ABOARD

Eva C. A. Asscher, Leonie N.C. Visser, Wiesje M. van der Flier, Annelien L. Bredenoord, Sven J. van der Lee, Jetske van der Schaar, Mariëtte van den Hoven, Ellen M.A. Smets, Yolande A.L. Pijnenburg
article en

Abstract

Abstract Background Data‐driven criteria for DNA testing were implemented in routine care of Alzheimer Center Amsterdam. We aimed to explore patients’ perspectives and considerations regarding their decision to (not) be tested for a monogenic cause of their disease. Methods In this mixed method study, 150 of 519 new patients visiting Alzheimer Center Amsterdam who fulfilled the criteria were offered DNA‐diagnostics: 86(57%) accepted, 64(43%) did not. In 65/86(76%) cases results were negative, in 14/86(16%) a monogenic cause and in 7/86 (8%) variants of uncertain significance were found ( Figure 1) . Sex, age, education, family history of dementia, MMSE and diagnosis were retrieved. Before discussing DNA testing, patients completed a questionnaire assessing perceived risk of a genetic cause, susceptibility for, severity of, and experience with dementia, social support, coping strategies, anxiety, depression, and quality of life. Differences between those who did and did not consent to DNA testing were calculated using Pearson’s χ², Mann‐Whitney U or Independent Samples t‐tests; p‐values were FDR‐adjusted. A subset of 22 patients and/or relatives participated in semi‐structured interviews on motivations and considerations regarding their decision. Verbatim transcripts were analyzed inductively using MAXQDA‐software. Results Participants (n = 150) were 46% female and aged 61±8 (MMSE = 22±6, 5 Subjective Cognitive Decline, 9 MCI, 104 dementia [69 AD, 13 FTD, 22 other], 32 other/undetermined). Adjusted for multiple testing, no demographic, medical or psychosocial factors were associated with the decision on DNA testing (all p >0.05). Twenty‐one interviewees who agreed to DNA testing were generally motivated by obtaining information on heredity for their relatives, contributing to scientific research into a treatment, and gaining insight in the cause of their disease. One patient had blood stored, allowing their children to test it when opportune. The majority decided quickly, mostly on intuitions (e.g., responsibility towards relatives) rather than facts (e.g., information on risk and consequences). They expected to feel reassured or relieved by negative test results, and sad or worried if a genetic cause was found. Conclusions Over half of memory clinic patients eligible for DNA‐testing wanted to be tested. This decision was unrelated to demographic, medical or psychosocial characteristics, and mostly based on intuition and considerations regarding family.

Alzheimer s & DementiaVol. 20(S5)
Karolinska Institutet (SE), Amsterdam Neuroscience (NL), GGD Amsterdam (NL), Amsterdam University Medical Centers (NL), Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (NL), University of Amsterdam (NL), Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Patient Dignity and Privacy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.