Literature DB >> 15991444

Architectures of genetic medicine: comparing genetic testing for breast cancer in the USA and the UK.

Shobita Parthasarathy.   

Abstract

This paper compares the development of genetic testing for breast cancer (BRCA testing) in the USA and the UK. It argues that national political cultures played an important role in how these genetic testing technologies were shaped, and that the shapes of these technologies had important implications for the users of these systems. In order to demonstrate the roles of national social and political elements in the development of new genetic testing technologies, I introduce the concept of a technology's architecture, which is made up of components and the specific ways in which these components are assembled to fulfill particular functions. In the USA, four very different BRCA testing systems initially emerged. However, one biotechnology company, Myriad Genetics, eventually used its legal and economic position to become the sole provider of testing. It offered BRCA testing the way many other laboratory tests were provided in the USA, available to anyone through any physician. The shape of this testing service had important implications for its participants, defining the client as a consumer who could demand access to any of Myriad's laboratory services, but could not choose among testing systems. In the UK, the government-run National Health Service provided testing through regional genetics clinics, using family history information to assess risk and triage care. Clients in the UK were defined as citizens and patients, who had the right to equal access to the testing system but could not demand any specific services.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15991444     DOI: 10.1177/0306312705047172

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Stud Sci        ISSN: 0306-3127            Impact factor:   3.885


  11 in total

1.  Unravelling fears of genetic discrimination: an exploratory study of Dutch HCM families in an era of genetic non-discrimination acts.

Authors:  Els Geelen; Klasien Horstman; Carlo L M Marcelis; Pieter A Doevendans; Ine Van Hoyweghen
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2012-03-28       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Choosing not to know: accounts of non-engagement with pre-symptomatic testing for Machado-Joseph disease.

Authors:  Álvaro Mendes; Milena Paneque; Angus Clarke; Jorge Sequeiros
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Informed decision making about predictive DNA tests: arguments for more public visibility of personal deliberations about the good life.

Authors:  Marianne Boenink; Simone van der Burg
Journal:  Med Health Care Philos       Date:  2010-05

4.  Myriad Genetics: In the eye of the policy storm.

Authors:  E Richard Gold; Julia Carbone
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 8.822

5.  Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to cancer: comparing breast and ovarian cancers with colon cancers.

Authors:  Robert Cook-Deegan; Christopher DeRienzo; Julia Carbone; Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Christopher Heaney; Christopher Conover
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 8.822

6.  Translating genetics beyond bench and bedside: A comparative perspective on health care infrastructures for 'familial' breast cancer.

Authors:  Erik Aarden
Journal:  Appl Transl Genom       Date:  2016-09-29

7.  Big Data Sharing: A Crucial Democratic Issue for Genomic Medicine.

Authors:  Benjamin Derbez
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2018-11-28

8.  Citizens under the umbrella: citizenship projects and the development of genetic umbrella organizations in the USA and the UK.

Authors:  Koichi Mikami
Journal:  New Genet Soc       Date:  2020-03-06

9.  Gene patents and personalized medicine - what lies ahead?

Authors:  Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Robert Cook-Deegan
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2009-09-28       Impact factor: 11.117

10.  When research seems like clinical care: a qualitative study of the communication of individual cancer genetic research results.

Authors:  Fiona A Miller; Mita Giacomini; Catherine Ahern; Jason S Robert; Sonya de Laat
Journal:  BMC Med Ethics       Date:  2008-02-22       Impact factor: 2.652

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.