Realizing the promise of personalized medicine.

Genzyme Genetics, Division of Genzyme Corporation, Westborough, Massachusetts, USA.
Harvard business review (Impact Factor: 1.27). 11/2007; 85(10):108-17, 165.
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Scientific advances have begun to give doctors the power to customize therapy for individuals. However, adoption of this approach has progressed slowly and unevenly because the trial-and-error treatment model still governs how the health care system develops, regulates, pays for, and delivers therapies. Aspinall, the president of Genzyme Genetics, and Hamermesh, chair of a Harvard Business School initiative to improve leadership in health care organizations, discuss the barriers to personalized medicine and suggest ways to overcome them. The blockbuster model for developing drugs, the authors point out, is still what most major pharmaceutical companies follow, even though its days are numbered. What the industry must embrace in its place is a business model based on a larger portfolio of targeted--and therefore more effective and profitable--treatments, not a limited palette of one-size-fits-all drugs. The current regulatory environment overemphasizes large-scale clinical trials of broad-based therapies. Instead, the focus should be on enrolling subpopulations, based on diagnostic testing, in trials of targeted drug treatments and on monitoring and assessing effectiveness after drugs are approved. A dysfunctional payment system complicates matters by rewarding providers for performance of procedures rather than for accurate diagnosis and effective prevention. Aspinall and Hamermesh call for coordinating regulation and reimbursement so that incentives are provided for the right outcomes. Finally, the authors urge changing physicians' habits through education about genomics, diagnostic testing, and targeted therapies. They say that medical schools and physician organizations must become committed advocates of personalized medicine so that patients and the medical industry can get all the benefits it offers.


Available from: Mara Aspinall, May 20, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The advent of "personalized medicine" has been driven by technological advances in genomics. Concentration at the subcellular level of a patient's cancer cells has meant inevitably that the "person" has been overlooked. For this reason, we think there is an urgent need to develop a truly personalized approach focusing on each patient as an individual, assessing his/her unique mental dimensions and tailoring interventions to his/her individual needs and preferences. The aim of this study was to develop and test the psychometric properties of the ALGA-Breast Cancer (ALGA-BC), a new multidimensional questionnaire that assesses the breast cancer patient's physical and mental characteristics in order to provide physicians, prior to the consultation, with a patient's profile that is supposed to facilitate subsequent communication, interaction, and information delivery between the doctor and the patient. The specific validation processes used were: content and face validity, construct validity using factor analysis, reliability and internal consistency using test-retest reliability, and Cronbach's alpha correlation coefficient. The exploratory analysis included 100 primary breast cancer patients and 730 healthy subjects. The exploratory factor analysis revealed eight key factors: global self-rated health, perceived physical health, anxiety, self-efficacy, cognitive closure, memory, body image, and sexual life. Test-retest reliability and internal consistency were good. Comparing patients with a sample of healthy subjects, we also observed a general ability of the ALGA-BC questionnaire to discriminate between the two. The ALGA-BC questionnaire with 29 items is a valid instrument with which to obtain a patient's profile that is supposed to help physicians achieve meaningful personalized care which supplements biological and genetic analyses.
    Breast Cancer: Targets and Therapy 06/2015; 7:133-146. DOI:10.2147/BCTT.S80014
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To capitalize on the vast potential of patient genetic information to aid in assuring drug safety, a substantial effort is needed in both the training of healthcare professionals and the operational enablement of clinical environments. Our research aims to satisfy these needs through the development of a drug safety assurance information system (GeneScription) based on clinical genotyping that utilizes patient-specific genetic information to predict and prevent adverse drug responses. In this paper, we present the motivations for this work, the algorithms at the heart of GeneScription, and a discussion of our system and its uses. We also describe our efforts to validate GeneScription through its evaluation by practicing pharmacists and pharmacy professors and its repeated use in training pharmacists. The positive assessment of the GeneScription software tool by these domain experts provides strong validation of the importance, accuracy, and effectiveness of GeneScription.
    11/2011; 2012. DOI:10.5402/2012/982737
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Behavioral interventions are typically studied with the use of a conventional between-subject randomized controlled trial (RCT) design. In this design, the effect of an intervention on one group of patients is compared with the effect of a control condition on another group of patients, such that a between-subject change is tested. A between-subject design has an underlying assumption that there is a homogenous treatment effect for a behavioral intervention, drug, or psychotherapy and that the way the intervention operates in the study will tend to operate in the same way in many other patients. We review some of the philosophical and practical problems with the use of this design when a clinician is attempting to decide on a course of behavioral treatment aimed at within-subject change in patients who are likely to have heterogeneous or unique responses to behavioral treatment. We also review the biases inherent in our current clinical practice model, which does not use any empirical data collection or design for testing if a treatment is useful, and also in the conventional between-subject personalized medicine RCT designs. We propose increased use of single-patient (also known as N-of-1) trials that employ within-subject designs, in cases where treatment response is heterogeneous – as is the case for most psychological and behavioral treatments. Limitations of such designs include that they can only be used when the treatment is potentially reversible, the patient can act as their own control, and the outcome can be measured repeatedly. Increased use of within-subject trials may address in many more instances the more clinically relevant question of how a specific patient will respond to a specific treatment and could introduce a more harmonious scientific approach into the way we treat our patients. We have incorporated a case presentation that illustrates the complexities of applying evidence drawn from these different designs to selecting and evaluating treatments for the behavioral issues commonly faced by clinicians and patients.
    Social and Personality Psychology Compass 08/2014; 8(8). DOI:10.1111/spc3.12121