Literature DB >> 19617843

The Scientific Foundation for personal genomics: recommendations from a National Institutes of Health-Centers for Disease Control and Prevention multidisciplinary workshop.

Muin J Khoury1, Colleen M McBride, Sheri D Schully, John P A Ioannidis, W Gregory Feero, A Cecile J W Janssens, Marta Gwinn, Denise G Simons-Morton, Jay M Bernhardt, Michele Cargill, Stephen J Chanock, George M Church, Ralph J Coates, Francis S Collins, Robert T Croyle, Barry R Davis, Gregory J Downing, Amy Duross, Susan Friedman, Mitchell H Gail, Geoffrey S Ginsburg, Robert C Green, Mark H Greene, Philip Greenland, Jeffrey R Gulcher, Andro Hsu, Kathy L Hudson, Sharon L R Kardia, Paul L Kimmel, Michael S Lauer, Amy M Miller, Kenneth Offit, David F Ransohoff, J Scott Roberts, Rebekah S Rasooly, Kari Stefansson, Sharon F Terry, Steven M Teutsch, Angela Trepanier, Kay L Wanke, John S Witte, Jianfeng Xu.   

Abstract

The increasing availability of personal genomic tests has led to discussions about the validity and utility of such tests and the balance of benefits and harms. A multidisciplinary workshop was convened by the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to review the scientific foundation for using personal genomics in risk assessment and disease prevention and to develop recommendations for targeted research. The clinical validity and utility of personal genomics is a moving target with rapidly developing discoveries but little translation research to close the gap between discoveries and health impact. Workshop participants made recommendations in five domains: (1) developing and applying scientific standards for assessing personal genomic tests; (2) developing and applying a multidisciplinary research agenda, including observational studies and clinical trials to fill knowledge gaps in clinical validity and utility; (3) enhancing credible knowledge synthesis and information dissemination to clinicians and consumers; (4) linking scientific findings to evidence-based recommendations for use of personal genomics; and (5) assessing how the concept of personal utility can affect health benefits, costs, and risks by developing appropriate metrics for evaluation. To fulfill the promise of personal genomics, a rigorous multidisciplinary research agenda is needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19617843      PMCID: PMC2936269          DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181b13a6c

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  83 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics: development, science, and translation.

Authors:  Richard M Weinshilboum; Liewei Wang
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 8.929

2.  Developing a center for comparative effectiveness information.

Authors:  Gail R Wilensky
Journal:  Health Aff (Millwood)       Date:  2006-11-07       Impact factor: 6.301

3.  Genomic profiles for disease risk: predictive or premature?

Authors:  Kenneth Offit
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2008-03-19       Impact factor: 56.272

4.  Counterpoint: genetic risk feedback for common disease time to test the waters.

Authors:  Patricia A Thompson
Journal:  Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 4.254

5.  Incorporating biomarkers of exposure and genetic susceptibility into smoking cessation treatment: effects on smoking-related cognitions, emotions, and behavior change.

Authors:  C Lerman; K Gold; J Audrain; T H Lin; N R Boyd; C T Orleans; B Wilfond; G Louben; N Caporaso
Journal:  Health Psychol       Date:  1997-01       Impact factor: 4.267

6.  Difficulty in losing weight by behavioral intervention for women with Trp64Arg polymorphism of the beta3-adrenergic receptor gene.

Authors:  K Shiwaku; A Nogi; E Anuurad; K Kitajima; B Enkhmaa; K Shimono; Y Yamane
Journal:  Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord       Date:  2003-09

7.  Who seeks genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease? Findings from a multisite, randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  J Scott Roberts; Melissa Barber; Tamsen M Brown; L Adrienne Cupples; Lindsay A Farrer; Susan A LaRusse; Stephen G Post; Kimberly A Quaid; Lisa D Ravdin; Norman R Relkin; A Dessa Sadovnick; Peter J Whitehouse; John L Woodard; Robert C Green
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2004 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 8.822

8.  Pharmacogenomic dosing of warfarin: ready or not?

Authors:  Thomas E Lackner
Journal:  Consult Pharm       Date:  2008-08

9.  Effects of attributing serious mental illnesses to genetic causes on orientations to treatment.

Authors:  Jo C Phelan; Lawrence H Yang; Rosangely Cruz-Rojas
Journal:  Psychiatr Serv       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 3.084

10.  The feasibility of online genetic testing for lung cancer susceptibility: uptake of a web-based protocol and decision outcomes.

Authors:  Suzanne C O'Neill; Della Brown White; Saskia C Sanderson; Isaac M Lipkus; Gerold Bepler; Lori A Bastian; Colleen M McBride
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  85 in total

1.  Cardiovascular epidemiology in a changing world--challenges to investigators and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

Authors:  Paul D Sorlie; Diane E Bild; Michael S Lauer
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2012-03-12       Impact factor: 4.897

2.  Multilevel research and the challenges of implementing genomic medicine.

Authors:  Muin J Khoury; Ralph J Coates; Mary L Fennell; Russell E Glasgow; Maren T Scheuner; Sheri D Schully; Marc S Williams; Steven B Clauser
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr       Date:  2012-05

3.  The prospect of genome-guided preventive medicine: a need and opportunity for genetic counselors.

Authors:  Julianne M O'Daniel
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2010-05-04       Impact factor: 2.537

4.  Health system implications of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing.

Authors:  Amy L McGuire; Wylie Burke
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2010-11-13       Impact factor: 2.000

5.  Role of genomics in cardiovascular medicine.

Authors:  Giuseppe Novelli; Irene M Predazzi; Ruggiero Mango; Francesco Romeo; Jawahar L Mehta
Journal:  World J Cardiol       Date:  2010-12-26

Review 6.  From prenatal genomic diagnosis to fetal personalized medicine: progress and challenges.

Authors:  Diana W Bianchi
Journal:  Nat Med       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 53.440

Review 7.  A compendium of genome-wide associations for cancer: critical synopsis and reappraisal.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis; Peter Castaldi; Evangelos Evangelou
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2010-05-26       Impact factor: 13.506

8.  Commentary: Children and predictive genomic testing: disease prevention, research protection, and our future.

Authors:  Beth A Tarini; Kenneth P Tercyak; Benjamin S Wilfond
Journal:  J Pediatr Psychol       Date:  2011-08-04

9.  Evaluation of genetic tests for susceptibility to common complex diseases: why, when and how?

Authors:  Caroline Fiona Wright; Mark Kroese
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2009-11-20       Impact factor: 4.132

10.  Translational research in cancer genetics: the road less traveled.

Authors:  S D Schully; C B Benedicto; E M Gillanders; S S Wang; M J Khoury
Journal:  Public Health Genomics       Date:  2009-12-29       Impact factor: 2.000

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.