What can we learn from nutrigenomics testing?

There is insufficient scientific evidence to support the utility of commercially available nutrigenomics tests that claim to link genetic variants to dietary intake or nutrition-related disorders. While nutrigenomics remains a promising tool for advancing personalized medicine and healthcare, more research is needed before it can help guide health-related decisions, according to a study published in OMICS: A Journal of Integrative Biology, the peer-reviewed interdisciplinary systems science journal published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers.

In "Meta-Analysis of Genes in Commercially Available Nutrigenomic Tests Denotes Lack of Association with Dietary Intake and Nutrient-Related Pathologies," Cristiana Pavlidis, et al., University of Patras, Greece, University of Trieste, Italy, and Kingston University, London, U.K., analyzed the published scientific studies on 38 genes that are included in nutrigenomics tests provided by various private genetic testing laboratories. The researchers reported no specific or statistically significant associations between any of the 38 genes and nutrition- or food-related diseases.

Senior author Professor George P. Patrinos notes that "This meta-analysis involved over half a million individuals and 38 genes analyzed in commercially available nutrigenomic tests. The results tell us that the past studies of human genome variation are conflicting as far as associations with nutrient-related pathologies and dietary intakes are considered. We need solid scientific evidence before nutrigenomic testing can be provided as a commercial service by genetic laboratories."

"Nutrigenomics is at the epicenter of the post-genomics funding agenda," says OMICS Editor-in-Chief Vural Özdemir, MD, PhD, DABCP. Prof. Patrinos and his team report a timely analysis of the commercially available nutrigenomics tests and offer ways forward for the next-generation nutrigenomics research agenda."