Biomedical subjects

Stacey Pereira

Publications and source records attributed to Stacey Pereira.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2026

Elective genomic sequencing for adults in research, clinical and commercial contexts.

PURPOSE: Elective genomic sequencing (EGS) returns monogenic disease findings in multiple genes, including potentially novel variants, and may also provide participants with carrier status, pharmacogenomic and other health-related information. The PeopleSeq Study assessed participants' motivations for and concerns about EGS and the associated clinical and psychosocial outcomes across diverse EGS providers. METHODS: We administered a shared questionnaire to participants who chose to undergo EGS via 18 academic, clinical, or commercial EGS platforms. RESULTS: We enrolled 1575 participants, of whom 1147 (72.8%) completed a questionnaire after receiving their EGS results. A majority (60.3%) of the participants who completed a post-result questionnaire self-reported receiving results they assessed as important, including negative findings, and 75.9% reported a form of health-related utility. Among a subset (19.4%) who shared their EGS reports, 16.6% (37 of n = 223) received a monogenic finding and self-reported results deemed "important" were consistent with EGS reports. Most participants (74.1%) discussed their results with their family, but fewer discussed their results with a healthcare provider other than the site team (41.7%) or had one or more medical visits as a direct result of their EGS testing (23.1%). Participants expressed diverse motivations for EGS, with 91.4% expressing interest in their personal disease risk and 54% who expressed quasi-indication-based motivations related to family medical history. Individuals motivated by family history reported important results at a significantly higher rate. CONCLUSIONS: Early adopters of EGS are motivated by general interest in their health as well as quasi-indication-based considerations such as family history. A majority of participants learned results they considered medically important, but a much smaller segment engaged healthcare providers with their results.

Genomic testing↗

PubMed2025

Eugenics and polygenic embryo screening: Public, clinician, and patient perceptions of conditions versus traits.

PURPOSE: Polygenic embryo screening (PES) estimates an embryo's genetic chances of developing complex conditions (eg, cancer) and traits (eg, height). Stakeholders have raised concerns that PES promotes eugenic practices and ideology. METHODS: We surveyed a nationally representative sample of the US public on approval of screening embryos for 12 conditions and 12 traits and examined the association between disapproval and concern about eugenics. We also conducted semistructured interviews with US-based reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists and patients undergoing in vitro fertilization on their perspectives toward PES. RESULTS: Among the US public (n = 1423), disapproval of screening embryos for traits has a stronger association with concern that PES promotes eugenics than disapproval of screening embryos for conditions. Interviews with reproductive endocrinology and infertility specialists (n = 27) and patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (n = 26) suggest that perceptions of PES as eugenic were more common when discussing screening and selecting for or against traits versus selecting against conditions. CONCLUSION: Results suggest PES for traits is more frequently associated with eugenics and perceived often as unacceptable, whereas PES for conditions is perceived sometimes as acceptable. Future research should explore whether the distinction between conditions and traits is meaningful in the definition of eugenics and/or approval of genomics-based embryo selection and how that influences clinical practices and policy.

Humans↗

PubMed2025

How do parents decide on genetic testing in pediatrics? A systematic review.

PURPOSE: This systematic review aims to identify the factors that influence parents' decisions regarding pediatric diagnostic genetic testing (DT) and predictive genetic testing (PT). These factors are integrated into a conceptual decision-making model. Implications for genetic counseling, research, and ethics were derived. METHODS: PubMed, PsychInfo, WebofScience, and related references were searched for original publications between 2000 and 2023. The extracted factors were categorized using existing models. RESULTS: Of the 5843 publications, 56 met the inclusion criteria. The included studies differentiated between DT, traditional PT, and expanded PT and described factors affecting parental decisions to have the child genetically tested and to be informed about additional findings. Factors included (1) benefits/hopes, (2) worries/concerns, (3) values and beliefs, (4) individual circumstances, and (5) emotional states. CONCLUSION: Our work extends the existing empirical decision model of family decisions about genome sequencing to genetic testing in pediatrics in general, adding the categories of individual circumstances and emotional states. These factors can be further integrated into the Health Belief Model; the importance of emotional states is reflected in dual-process theories, such as the Fuzzy Trace Theory. Research is required on emotional states, differences between DT and PT, parents' decisions regarding result disclosure, and dyadic variables as decision-making predictors.

Humans↗

PubMed2024

Family genetic risk communication and reverse cascade testing in the BabySeq project.

PURPOSE: Genomic sequencing of newborns can initiate disease surveillance and therapy for children and may identify at-risk relatives through reverse cascade testing. We explored genetic risk communication and reverse cascade testing among families of newborns who underwent exome sequencing and were identified as having a risk for an autosomal dominant disease. METHODS: We conducted semistructured interviews with parents of newborns enrolled in the BabySeq Project who had a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant associated with an autosomal dominant childhood- and/or adult-onset disease returned. We used directed content analysis to derive themes. RESULTS: From 11 families, all first-degree relatives (n = 32, 100%), 29 second-degree relatives (76%), and 26 third-degree relatives (43%) were informed of their risk. All parents (n = 22, 69% of first-degree relatives), 4 (11%) second-degree relatives, and 1 (2%) third-degree relatives underwent cascade testing. Most parents preferred to handle risk communication themselves. Parents with positive cascade testing but no associated symptoms were less inclined to share findings with relatives but highly motivated to share results if the variant's associated disease severity was high, as perceived with adult-onset conditions. One new subtheme, family member traits, was identified and defined as a relative's propensity to anxiety/concern after risk communications but did not diminish risk communication. CONCLUSION: Findings can inform more effective notification and testing practices for families of newborns at risk for hereditary genetic conditions.

Humans↗