David M Thomas, Joanne M Hackett, Stjepko Plestina
{"title":"Unlocking Access to Broad Molecular Profiling: Benefits, Barriers, and Policy Solutions.","authors":"David M Thomas, Joanne M Hackett, Stjepko Plestina","doi":"10.1159/000520000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>\"Personalized healthcare\" is generating new approaches to disease management by considering inter-individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle. Technologies such as comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) are drivers of this shift. Here, we address the significant hurdles to the equitable implementation of CGP into routine clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This article draws on published evidence on the value of genomic profiling, as well as interviews with nine academic and clinical experts from six different countries to validate findings and test policy proposals for reforms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The potential benefits of CGP extend beyond direct patient outcomes, to healthcare systems with societal and economic impacts. Among key barriers impeding integration into routine clinical practice are the lack of infrastructure to ensure reliable clinical testing and the limited understanding of genomics among healthcare personnel. In addition, the absence of health economic evidence supporting broader use of CGP is creating concerns for payers regarding the systemic benefits and affordability of this technology.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Policy proposals that aim to improve equitable patient access to CGP will need to consider new funding models, health technology assessment processes that capture both patient and systemic benefits, and appropriate regulatory standards to determine the quality of genomic profiling tests.</p>","PeriodicalId":49650,"journal":{"name":"Public Health Genomics","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Public Health Genomics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000520000","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: "Personalized healthcare" is generating new approaches to disease management by considering inter-individual variability in genes, environment, and lifestyle. Technologies such as comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) are drivers of this shift. Here, we address the significant hurdles to the equitable implementation of CGP into routine clinical practice.
Methods: This article draws on published evidence on the value of genomic profiling, as well as interviews with nine academic and clinical experts from six different countries to validate findings and test policy proposals for reforms.
Results: The potential benefits of CGP extend beyond direct patient outcomes, to healthcare systems with societal and economic impacts. Among key barriers impeding integration into routine clinical practice are the lack of infrastructure to ensure reliable clinical testing and the limited understanding of genomics among healthcare personnel. In addition, the absence of health economic evidence supporting broader use of CGP is creating concerns for payers regarding the systemic benefits and affordability of this technology.
Conclusion: Policy proposals that aim to improve equitable patient access to CGP will need to consider new funding models, health technology assessment processes that capture both patient and systemic benefits, and appropriate regulatory standards to determine the quality of genomic profiling tests.
期刊介绍:
''Public Health Genomics'' is the leading international journal focusing on the timely translation of genome-based knowledge and technologies into public health, health policies, and healthcare as a whole. This peer-reviewed journal is a bimonthly forum featuring original papers, reviews, short communications, and policy statements. It is supplemented by topic-specific issues providing a comprehensive, holistic and ''all-inclusive'' picture of the chosen subject. Multidisciplinary in scope, it combines theoretical and empirical work from a range of disciplines, notably public health, molecular and medical sciences, the humanities and social sciences. In so doing, it also takes into account rapid scientific advances from fields such as systems biology, microbiomics, epigenomics or information and communication technologies as well as the hight potential of ''big data'' for public health.