Some 650 diseases can be now be identified through
techniques for genetic diagnosis and our perception of disease is
changing as a result. Clinical symptoms are no longer essential for
a diagnosis. Gene analysis makes it possible to detect disease at
all stages of life. Those conditions which are marked by anomalies
of genes or chromosomes can be detected not only in adults, but in
the fetus and even in single cells obtained from early embryos and
blastocysts. Not only can existing diseases be diagnosed, but the
appearance of degenerative diseases later in adult life can be
known with certainty and for some types of cancer, the probability
of developing a tumor can be predicted. As we accumulate data on
the human genome and acquire ever-more sophisticated tools to
interpret the data, the number of tests available will grow and
probably encompass the 5000 or so conditions with a genetic origin.
It will be more difficult, but not entirely impossible, to find
solutions for the identification of individual patient risks from
conditions that are polygenic and multifactorial, with include a
number of common chronic pathological processes including
hypertension and diabetes.
For the laboratories involved in molecular and
genetic diagnosis, this type of testing will profoundly change the
relationships between clinician, laboratorian, and patient.
Molecular diagnosis changes the relationship of the individual to
his disease and to the medical and scientific community dealing
with the disease. The individual patient's perception of himself or
herself and the relationships with society and social perceptions
can be deeply affected by this new capacity for genetic diagnoses.
An additional factor will be the payment for the tests, since it is
unlikely that all health insurers will be able to reimburse the
costs of genetic screening and testing. Today, a large part is
financed by charities and state research funds - tomorrow, access
may be easier for only the more wealthy patients.
There can be little doubt that for the genetic
diagnoses for which there are definite forms of treatment, the
situation is ideal. The test procedure simplifies the clinical
examination, eliminates clinical doubt, and allows early
instigation of the appropriate treatment. A perfect example is
hemochromatosis of genetic origin. The excessive absorption of iron
results from a defect in regulation of absorption of iron, the
symptoms of which develop over years, with a variety of clinical
features : chronic asthenia, arthropathy, skin pigmentation, with
cirrhosis, diabetes or cardiomyopathy in later stages. The
identification of the gene which is altered in hemochromatosis has
radically simplified the diagnosis of this condition. For a patient
with an increased saturation of transferrin, the diagnosis of
hemachromatosis is made simply by demonstrating that the patient is
homozygotic for the mutated form of the gene (C282Y + /+
).
Hemochromatosis is a remarkable illustration of
pathological condition whose clinical management has benefited in
record time from a fundamental discovery in molecular genetics. It
is something of a paradox that the treatment of the disease by
bloodletting is almost medieval in approach, yet the diagnosis is
definitely a 21 st century approach.
In other conditions, a diagnosis can be made
certain by identifying one or more mutations but this approach does
not give an indication of the severity of the disease nor of the
nature of the symptoms which will appear. The value of the
diagnosis is less when there is no specific treatment, or if there
is controversy concerning the effectiveness of the treatment or for
measures that prevent the progress of the condition.
Concerning serious or incurable illnesses, the
localization of a familial mutation opens the possibility for an
antenatal diagnosis. This allows the pregnancy to proceed in the
knowledge of the likely outcomes for the child and the family. In
some cases, the parents may choose for the pregnancy to be
terminated. An alternative approach in some countries is to use in
vitro fertilization, with the genetic testing performed on single
cell biopsies from blastocysts, with implantation of the
blastocysts not showing the gene marker concerned. Certainly this
reduces the numbers of fetal deaths and late abortions arising from
a number of genetic disorders, but the risk of eugenic exploitation
of the procedure. Also, this approach can create the impression in
society that gene-related disorders, many of which result in
handicap, are avoidable. This is far from reality, as is should be
clear from the "spontaneous" mutation rates of the genes
involved.
For the genes that are predictive of the future
development of cancers or degenerative diseases, other questions
can be raised. Is it useful for a person in apparent good health to
know that this state of well-being will probably not continue, but
with no clear indication of when or where the change will happen?
How does this knowledge affect the individual's personal, family,
social and professional functioning?
For some, the confirmation of presence or absence
of the disease makes it possible to eliminate the inevitable
anguish of uncertainty. It can help to better prepare the future.
However, this is not possible unless the genetic diagnosis is made
in a multidisciplinary context. The molecular biologist has to work
in a team combining geneticists, psychologists, and other
specialists in health disciplines and social support. Notions of
guilt and responsibility have to be carefully managed in genetic
counseling, in order to avoid rejection of carriers or affected
individuals in their social or marital contexts.
Genetic tests are certainly fascinating in terms of
science. Despite the precision of the diagnosis, it has to be
remembered that they are only a diagnostic description - and often
of conditions that have no remedy or effective treatment.
Nonetheless they do give cause for hope that mechanisms of cause
and effect in gene mutations will be better understood and
controlled at sometime in the future.
In the way that genetic testing is performed, it is
important to maintain the key importance of what is in the best
interest of the patients. Testing has to be regulated to ensure
that it does have a medical purpose. The medical purpose can differ
from the purely scientific interest, in that it is intended for a
particular person and only that person. Investigational decisions
that deal with the investigator's perceptions of the "greater good"
of society or the development of techniques with commercial
potential can sometimes interfere with the logic of the
decision-making process, however. The investigation and management
of the patients with genetic disorders has to be made with
reference to clinical research practice and basic humans
rights.
This has led laboratory professionals to undertake
a process of deliberation in order to identify the key principles
of genetic testing that are essential and which should be shared
with society. For these reasons IFCC has set up a committee on
ethics (Chair, Professor Leslie BURNETT
burnett@med.usyd.edu.au)
whose aims are to increase awareness among Laboratory Medicine
Professionals of ethical issues ; to encourage the practice of
Laboratory Medicine to the highest ethical standards ; to develop
position papers on appropriate ethics policies issues ; to provide
a voice for Laboratory Medicine on ethics policies ; to link
Laboratory Medicine, ethics and the public interest.