Literature DB >> 22911520

An integrated framework of personalized medicine: from individual genomes to participatory health care.

Andrea W M Evers1, Maroeska M Rovers, Jan A M Kremer, Joris A Veltman, Jack A Schalken, Bas R Bloem, Alain J van Gool.   

Abstract

Promising research developments in both basic and applied sciences, such as genomics and participatory health care approaches, have generated widespread interest in personalized medicine among almost all scientific areas and clinicians. The term personalized medicine is, however, frequently used without defining a clear theoretical and methodological background. In addition, to date most personalized medicine approaches still lack convincing empirical evidence regarding their contribution and advantages in comparison to traditional models. Here, we propose that personalized medicine can only fulfill the promise of optimizing our health care system by an interdisciplinary and translational view that extends beyond traditional diagnostic and classification systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22911520      PMCID: PMC3428816          DOI: 10.3325/cmj.2012.53.301

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Croat Med J        ISSN: 0353-9504            Impact factor:   1.351


Abstract Promising research developments in both basic and applied sciences, such as genomics and participatory health care approaches, have generated widespread interest in personalized medicine among almost all scientific areas and clinicians. The term personalized medicine is, however, frequently used without defining a clear theoretical and methodological background. In addition, to date most personalized medicine approaches still lack convincing empirical evidence regarding their contribution and advantages in comparison to traditional models. Here, we propose that personalized medicine can only fulfill the promise of optimizing our health care system by an interdisciplinary and translational view that extends beyond traditional diagnostic and classification systems. Personalized medicine refers to the identification of risk factors and tailoring of management and treatment to the individual characteristics of each patient (1-3). This concept proposes to classify individuals into subpopulations that differ in disease etiology, development, and prognosis, susceptibility to a particular disease or their response to a specific treatment. Preventive or therapeutic interventions can subsequently be targeted to those who will benefit, to save costs for those who will not respond, and to decrease side effects for those who are likely to respond adversely. In addition, personalized medicine is also of utmost importance in other aspects of medicine, outside the scope of treatment. Based on genomic information, patients and families can for example obtain personalized information about the predicted disease development and optimize patient management. Also, they can learn about the risk of this disease occurring in further pregnancies and possibilities to prevent this by means of preimplantation genetic diagnosis. The term personalized medicine has become tremendously popular since US President Barack Obama, as a senator in 2006, introduced the Genomics and Personalized Medicine Act to facilitate the introduction of personalized medicine. Promising research developments in both basic and applied sciences, such as genomics (1-4) and participatory health care approaches (5-8) further boosted the common interest in personalized medicine among almost all scientific areas and clinicians. However, the term personalized medicine is frequently used without defining a clear theoretical and methodological background. In addition, although conceptually attractive, to date most personalized medicine approaches still lack convincing empirical evidence regarding their contribution, and advantages in comparison to traditional models. Here, we propose that personalized medicine can only fulfill the promise of optimizing our health care system by an interdisciplinary, translational, and transdiagnostic view that extends beyond traditional diagnostic and classification systems. We anticipate the following challenges for these developments: 1. Since personalized medicine includes a broad interdisciplinary research area (including both basic and applied approaches), there is a need to develop a translational research framework. Such integrated interdisciplinary frameworks of personalized medicine are currently lacking, particularly in the more applied, clinical sciences, including concepts such as participatory health care, patient involvement, or patient-centeredness (1-3,5,6). Consequently, a coherent framework for science, care, and management has to be developed, in which tailored and individual based approaches are used beyond traditional diagnostics and classification methods. 2. Studies on the comparative effectiveness of personalized medicine in comparison with more traditional models are still scarce in almost all disciplines (1-3,7,8). However, to become the promised translational and interdisciplinary revolution of our health care system, the additional contribution and advantages of personalized medicine approaches (eg, tailored vs non-tailored approaches) have to be systematically investigated and proven. 3. Tailored approaches based on multidisciplinary cumulative data (including genetic, biomedical, and behavioral measures) from experimental and observational databases – proposed as a prerequisite for personalized medicine – are insufficiently available (1-3,7,8). Only these databases provide the size and flexibility needed to explore and confirm some of the relevant risk factors and subgrouping variables, which can help to individualize treatment decisions. In addition, the methodology of identifying relevant factors within these databases needs to be developed further. To integrate these various approaches and to develop a common strategy for personalized medicine, the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre has founded a Task Force with a broad research and clinical scope (including a range of methodological approaches, such as genomics, molecular biology, proteomics, epidemiology, and medical internet technology, as well as a range of medical and social disciplines, including urology, gynecology, neurology, and medical psychology). This interdisciplinary Task Force has the potential to develop an integrative framework of personalized medicine, by focusing on the following concrete goals: 1. Developing interdisciplinary and translational research networks for researchers, to develop innovative strategies and health care approaches in the area of personalized medicine; 2. Developing risk-factor based models for personalized medicine approaches that are no longer defined within existing classification and diagnostic systems, but are tailored to individualized risk factors of patients; 3. Assembling databases of genetic, biomedical, and behavioral data in cohort studies for testing generic and disease specific personalized medicine models; 4. Developing innovative methodological approaches of testing specific personalized medicine models from a genomic, social, epidemiological, and/or statistical view; 5. Conducting interdisciplinary and translational research into personalized medicine with a broad range of biomedical, chemical, technological, and social sciences; 6. Evaluating the additional contribution and cost-effectiveness of personalized medicine approaches (eg, tailored vs non-tailored care, patient involvement); 7. Implementing broad strategies of personalized medicine and participatory health care into regular clinical care (eg, personalized risk-factor based approaches of tailored care for various conditions). Only when we are able to develop this integrated personalized medicine framework, personalized medicine can fulfill its promise of increased effectiveness, broad availability of personalized care approaches, and a stronger focus on participatory health care. The final goal is to develop a well-defined translational research and health care strategy that has benefits for each individual patient.
  8 in total

1.  The path to personalized medicine.

Authors:  Margaret A Hamburg; Francis S Collins
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2010-06-15       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Does comparative-effectiveness research threaten personalized medicine?

Authors:  Alan M Garber; Sean R Tunis
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 3.  Genomics, health care, and society.

Authors:  Kathy L Hudson
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2011-09-15       Impact factor: 91.245

4.  A P5 cancer medicine approach: why personalized medicine cannot ignore psychology.

Authors:  Gabriella Pravettoni; Alessandra Gorini
Journal:  J Eval Clin Pract       Date:  2011-06-16       Impact factor: 2.431

Review 5.  Person-centered medicine versus personalized medicine: is it just a sophism? A view from chronic pain management.

Authors:  Marijana Braš; Veljko Dorđević; Vibor Milunović; Lovorka Brajković; Davor Miličić; Lukasz Konopka
Journal:  Psychiatr Danub       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.063

6.  Methodological standards and patient-centeredness in comparative effectiveness research: the PCORI perspective.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2012-04-18       Impact factor: 56.272

Review 7.  Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice.

Authors:  Justin Jagosh; Ann C Macaulay; Pierre Pluye; Jon Salsberg; Paula L Bush; Jim Henderson; Erin Sirett; Geoff Wong; Margaret Cargo; Carol P Herbert; Sarena D Seifer; Lawrence W Green; Trisha Greenhalgh
Journal:  Milbank Q       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.911

8.  Systems medicine and integrated care to combat chronic noncommunicable diseases.

Authors:  Jean Bousquet; Josep M Anto; Peter J Sterk; Ian M Adcock; Kian Fan Chung; Josep Roca; Alvar Agusti; Chris Brightling; Anne Cambon-Thomsen; Alfredo Cesario; Sonia Abdelhak; Stylianos E Antonarakis; Antoine Avignon; Andrea Ballabio; Eugenio Baraldi; Alexander Baranov; Thomas Bieber; Joël Bockaert; Samir Brahmachari; Christian Brambilla; Jacques Bringer; Michel Dauzat; Ingemar Ernberg; Leonardo Fabbri; Philippe Froguel; David Galas; Takashi Gojobori; Peter Hunter; Christian Jorgensen; Francine Kauffmann; Philippe Kourilsky; Marek L Kowalski; Doron Lancet; Claude Le Pen; Jacques Mallet; Bongani Mayosi; Jacques Mercier; Andres Metspalu; Joseph H Nadeau; Grégory Ninot; Denis Noble; Mehmet Oztürk; Susanna Palkonen; Christian Préfaut; Klaus Rabe; Eric Renard; Richard G Roberts; Boleslav Samolinski; Holger J Schünemann; Hans-Uwe Simon; Marcelo Bento Soares; Giulio Superti-Furga; Jesper Tegner; Sergio Verjovski-Almeida; Peter Wellstead; Olaf Wolkenhauer; Emiel Wouters; Rudi Balling; Anthony J Brookes; Dominique Charron; Christophe Pison; Zhu Chen; Leroy Hood; Charles Auffray
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 11.117

  8 in total
  8 in total

Review 1.  Antidotes, antibody-mediated immunity and the future of pharmaceutical product development.

Authors:  Salvador Eugenio C Caoili
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Future of biobanks - bigger, longer, and more dimensional.

Authors:  Ozren Polasek
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2013-10-28       Impact factor: 1.351

3.  Dynamic software design for clinical exome and genome analyses: insights from bioinformaticians, clinical geneticists, and genetic counselors.

Authors:  Casper Shyr; Andre Kushniruk; Clara D M van Karnebeek; Wyeth W Wasserman
Journal:  J Am Med Inform Assoc       Date:  2015-06-27       Impact factor: 4.497

Review 4.  Personalization of medical treatments in oncology: time for rethinking the disease concept to improve individual outcomes.

Authors:  Mariano Bizzarri; Valeria Fedeli; Noemi Monti; Alessandra Cucina; Maroua Jalouli; Saleh H Alwasel; Abdel Halim Harrath
Journal:  EPMA J       Date:  2021-10-07       Impact factor: 6.543

5.  Chemistry and personalized medicine - the research and development future of Europe.

Authors:  Gunars Duburs; Denis Neibecker; Neven Žarković
Journal:  Croat Med J       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 1.351

6.  Validation of Self-Management Screening (SeMaS), a tool to facilitate personalised counselling and support of patients with chronic diseases.

Authors:  Nathalie Eikelenboom; Ivo Smeele; Marjan Faber; Annelies Jacobs; Frank Verhulst; Joyca Lacroix; Michel Wensing; Jan van Lieshout
Journal:  BMC Fam Pract       Date:  2015-11-11       Impact factor: 2.497

7.  Implementation of personalized self-management support using the self-management screening questionnaire SeMaS; a study protocol for a cluster randomized trial.

Authors:  Nathalie Eikelenboom; Jan van Lieshout; Michel Wensing; Ivo Smeele; Annelies E Jacobs
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2013-10-17       Impact factor: 2.279

8.  Critical Time Intervention for People Leaving Shelters in the Netherlands: Assessing Fidelity and Exploring Facilitators and Barriers.

Authors:  Renée de Vet; Danielle A M Lako; Mariëlle D Beijersbergen; Linda van den Dries; Sarah Conover; Albert M van Hemert; Daniel B Herman; Judith R L M Wolf
Journal:  Adm Policy Ment Health       Date:  2017-01
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.