Literature DB >> 22460301

Points to consider in assessing and appraising predictive genetic tests.

Wolf H Rogowski1, Scott D Grosse, Jürgen John, Helena Kääriäinen, Alastair Kent, Ulf Kristofferson, Jörg Schmidtke.   

Abstract

The use of predictive genetic tests is expanding rapidly. Given limited health care budgets and few national coverage decisions specifically for genetic tests, evidence of benefits and harms is a key requirement in decision making; however, assessing the benefits and harms of genetic tests raises a number of challenging issues. Frequently, evidence of medical benefits and harms is limited due to practical and ethical limitations of conducting meaningful clinical trials. Also, clinical endpoints frequently do not capture the benefit appropriately because the main purpose of many genetic tests is personal utility of knowing the test results, and costs of the tests and counseling can be insufficient indicators of the total costs of care. This study provides an overview of points to consider for the assessment of benefits and harms from genetic tests in an ethically and economically reflected manner. We discuss whether genetic tests are sufficiently exceptional to warrant exceptional methods for assessment and appraisal.

Year:  2010        PMID: 22460301      PMCID: PMC3186003          DOI: 10.1007/s12687-010-0028-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Community Genet        ISSN: 1868-310X


  53 in total

Review 1.  Challenges of translating genetic tests into clinical and public health practice.

Authors:  Wolf H Rogowski; Scott D Grosse; Muin J Khoury
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2009-07       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 2.  Economic methods for valuing the outcomes of genetic testing: beyond cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Scott D Grosse; Sarah Wordsworth; Katherine Payne
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 8.822

3.  Non-invasive prenatal testing: ethical issues explored.

Authors:  Antina de Jong; Wybo J Dondorp; Christine E M de Die-Smulders; Suzanne G M Frints; Guido M W R de Wert
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2009-12-02       Impact factor: 4.246

4.  IFCC position paper: report of the IFCC taskforce on ethics: introduction and framework.

Authors:  Leslie Burnett; Matthew J McQueen; Jon Johannes Jonsson; Francesca Torricelli
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 3.694

5.  Screening blood donors for hereditary hemochromatosis: decision analysis model comparing genotyping to phenotyping.

Authors:  P C Adams; L S Valberg
Journal:  Am J Gastroenterol       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 10.864

6.  The cost-effectiveness of screening for hereditary hemochromatosis in Germany: a remodeling study.

Authors:  Wolf H Rogowski
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2009-01-30       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  All in the family: disclosure of "unwanted" information to an adolescent to benefit a relative.

Authors:  Colleen C Denny; Benjamin S Wilfond; June A Peters; Neelam Giri; Blanche P Alter
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2008-11-01       Impact factor: 2.802

Review 8.  The psychological impact of testing for thrombophilia: a systematic review.

Authors:  D M Cohn; F Vansenne; A A Kaptein; C A J M De Borgie; S Middeldorp
Journal:  J Thromb Haemost       Date:  2008-07-01       Impact factor: 5.824

Review 9.  Risk reduction and health promotion behaviors following genetic testing for adult-onset disorders.

Authors:  Theresa A Beery; Janet K Williams
Journal:  Genet Test       Date:  2007

10.  Impact of hemochromatosis screening in patients with indeterminate results: the hemochromatosis and iron overload screening study.

Authors:  Roger T Anderson; Lari Wenzel; Ann P Walker; Andrea Ruggiero; Ronald T Acton; Mark A Hall; Diane C Tucker; Elizabeth Thomson; Barbara Harrison; Edmund Howe; Joan Holup; Catherine Leiendecker-Foster; Tara Power; Paul Adams
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  11 in total

1.  Criteria for fairly allocating scarce health-care resources to genetic tests: which matter most?

Authors:  Wolf H Rogowski; Scott D Grosse; Jörg Schmidtke; Georg Marckmann
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-08-07       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 2.  Personal utility in genomic testing: a systematic literature review.

Authors:  Jennefer N Kohler; Erin Turbitt; Barbara B Biesecker
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 4.246

3.  Genetic counseling, genetic testing, and risk perceptions for breast and colorectal cancer: Results from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey.

Authors:  Erin Turbitt; Megan C Roberts; Jennifer M Taber; Erika A Waters; Timothy S McNeel; Barbara B Biesecker; William M P Klein
Journal:  Prev Med       Date:  2019-02-25       Impact factor: 4.018

4.  Primary care patients' views and decisions about, experience of and reactions to direct-to-consumer genetic testing: a longitudinal study.

Authors:  Katherine Wasson; Tonya Nashay Sanders; Nancy S Hogan; Sara Cherny; Kathy J Helzlsouer
Journal:  J Community Genet       Date:  2013-07-07

5.  Eliciting preferences for priority setting in genetic testing: a pilot study comparing best-worst scaling and discrete-choice experiments.

Authors:  Franziska Severin; Jörg Schmidtke; Axel Mühlbacher; Wolf H Rogowski
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 4.246

Review 6.  Is individualized medicine more cost-effective? A systematic review.

Authors:  Maximilian H M Hatz; Katharina Schremser; Wolf H Rogowski
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.981

Review 7.  Issues surrounding the health economic evaluation of genomic technologies.

Authors:  James Buchanan; Sarah Wordsworth; Anna Schuh
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics       Date:  2013-11       Impact factor: 2.533

Review 8.  Genetic data and electronic health records: a discussion of ethical, logistical and technological considerations.

Authors:  Kimberly Shoenbill; Norman Fost; Umberto Tachinardi; Eneida A Mendonca
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2013-06-14       Impact factor: 4.497

9.  Points to consider for prioritizing clinical genetic testing services: a European consensus process oriented at accountability for reasonableness.

Authors:  Franziska Severin; Pascal Borry; Martina C Cornel; Norman Daniels; Florence Fellmann; Shirley Victoria Hodgson; Heidi C Howard; Jürgen John; Helena Kääriäinen; Hülya Kayserili; Alastair Kent; Florian Koerber; Ulf Kristoffersson; Mark Kroese; Celine Lewis; Georg Marckmann; Peter Meyer; Arne Pfeufer; Jörg Schmidtke; Heather Skirton; Lisbeth Tranebjærg; Wolf H Rogowski
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2014-09-24       Impact factor: 4.246

10.  Concepts of 'personalization' in personalized medicine: implications for economic evaluation.

Authors:  Wolf Rogowski; Katherine Payne; Petra Schnell-Inderst; Andrea Manca; Ursula Rochau; Beate Jahn; Oguzhan Alagoz; Reiner Leidl; Uwe Siebert
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 4.981

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.