The Economics of Genomic Medicine Insights From the IOM Roundtable on Translating Genomic-Based Research for Health

Maine-Dartmouth Family Medicine Residency, Augusta, Maine, USA.
JAMA The Journal of the American Medical Association (Impact Factor: 35.29). 03/2013; 309(12):1235-6. DOI: 10.1001/jama.2013.113
Source: PubMed
8 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Growing concern regarding costs of care and health outcomes in the United States has led to widespread calls to address the issue of health care spending. Today, providers across the country are working both to improve the quality and to reduce the cost of health care. These activities span multiple care delivery settings and include care standardization and redesign, shared decision making, palliative care, care coordination, readmission reduction, patient engagement, predictive modeling, and direct cost reduction. These efforts differ from those undertaken in the past because of the availability of information technology tools to collect and analyze data, and because of the emphasis on cost reduction in conjunction with quality improvement. Although the available literature reflects only a small fraction of the provider activities currently in progress, there is cause for hope for achieving a sustainable, innovative, and value-driven health care system. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Medicine Volume 65 is January 14, 2014. Please see for revised estimates.
    Annual review of medicine 09/2013; 65. DOI:10.1146/annurev-med-100312-135931 · 12.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aim: Genomic interventions could enable improved disease stratification and individually tailored therapies. However, they have had a limited impact on clinical practice to date due to a lack of evidence, particularly economic evidence. This is partly because health economists are yet to reach consensus on whether existing methods are sufficient to evaluate genomic technologies. As different approaches may produce conflicting adoption decisions, clarification is urgently required. This article summarizes the methodological issues associated with conducting economic evaluations of genomic interventions. Materials & methods: A structured literature review was conducted to identify references that considered the methodological challenges faced when conducting economic evaluations of genomic interventions. Results: Methodological challenges related to the analytical approach included the choice of comparator, perspective and timeframe. Challenges in costing centered around the need to collect a broad range of costs, frequently, in a data-limited environment. Measuring outcomes is problematic as standard measures have limited applicability, however, alternative metrics (e.g., personal utility) are underdeveloped and alternative approaches (e.g., cost-benefit analysis) underused. Effectiveness data quality is weak and challenging to incorporate into standard economic analyses, while little is known about patient and clinician behavior in this context. Comprehensive value of information analyses are likely to be helpful. Conclusion: Economic evaluations of genomic technologies present a particular challenge for health economists. New methods may be required to resolve these issues, but the evidence to justify alternative approaches is yet to be produced. This should be the focus of future work in this field.
    Pharmacogenomics 11/2013; 14(15):1833-47. DOI:10.2217/pgs.13.183 · 3.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The use of molecular tools to individualize health care, predict appropriate therapies, and prevent adverse health outcomes has gained significant traction in the field of oncology under the banner of "personalized medicine" (PM). Enthusiasm for PM in oncology has been fueled by success stories of targeted treatments for a variety of cancers based on their molecular profiles. Though these are clear indications of optimism for PM, little is known about the ethical and social implications of personalized approaches in clinical oncology. The objective of this study is to assess how a range of stakeholders engaged in promoting, monitoring, and providing PM understand the challenges of integrating genomic testing and targeted therapies into clinical oncology. The study involved the analysis of in-depth interviews with 117 stakeholders whose experiences and perspectives on PM span a wide variety of institutional and professional settings. Despite their considerable enthusiasm for this shift, promoters, monitors, and providers of PM identified 4 domains that provoke heightened ethical and social concerns: (1) informed consent for cancer genomic testing, (2) privacy, confidentiality, and disclosure of genomic test results, (3) access to genomic testing and targeted therapies in oncology, and (4) the costs of scaling up pharmacogenomic testing and targeted cancer therapies. These specific concerns are not unique to oncology, or even genomics. However, those most invested in the success of PM view oncologists' responses to these challenges as precedent setting because oncology is farther along the path of clinical integration of genomic technologies than other fields of medicine. This study illustrates that the rapid emergence of PM approaches in clinical oncology provides a crucial lens for identifying and managing potential frictions and pitfalls that emerge as health care paradigms shift in these directions.
    Urologic Oncology 02/2014; 32(2):187-92. DOI:10.1016/j.urolonc.2013.10.009 · 2.77 Impact Factor
Show more