Literature DB >> 23037935

Getting our priorities straight: a novel framework for stakeholder-informed prioritization of cancer genomics research.

Laura C Esmail1, Josh Roth, Sneha Rangarao, Josh J Carlson, Rahber Thariani, Scott D Ramsey, David L Veenstra, Patricia Deverka.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Prioritization of translational research on genomic tests is critically important given the rapid pace of innovation in genomics. The goal of this study was to evaluate a stakeholder-informed priority-setting framework in cancer genomics.
METHODS: An external stakeholder advisory group including patients/consumers, payers, clinicians, and test developers used a modified Delphi approach to prioritize six candidate cancer genomic technologies during a 1-day meeting. Nine qualitative priority-setting criteria were considered. We used a directed, qualitative content-analysis approach to investigate the themes of the meeting discussion.
RESULTS: Stakeholders primarily discussed six of the original nine criteria: clinical benefits, population health impacts, economic impacts, analytical and clinical validity, clinical trial implementation and feasibility, and market factors. Several new priority-setting criteria were identified from the workshop transcript, including "patient-reported outcomes," "clinical trial ethics," and "trial recruitment." The new criteria were incorporated with prespecified criteria to develop a novel priority-setting framework.
CONCLUSION: This study highlights key criteria that stakeholders can consider when prioritizing comparative effectiveness research for cancer genomic applications. Applying an explicit priority-setting framework to inform investment in comparative effectiveness research can help to ensure that critical factors are weighed when deciding between many potential research questions and trial designs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23037935      PMCID: PMC4479129          DOI: 10.1038/gim.2012.103

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


  18 in total

1.  Prioritization in comparative effectiveness research: the CANCERGEN Experience.

Authors:  Rahber Thariani; William Wong; Josh J Carlson; Louis Garrison; Scott Ramsey; Patricia A Deverka; Laura Esmail; Sneha Rangarao; Carolyn J Hoban; Laurence H Baker; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 2.983

2.  Three approaches to qualitative content analysis.

Authors:  Hsiu-Fang Hsieh; Sarah E Shannon
Journal:  Qual Health Res       Date:  2005-11

3.  AHRQ series paper 3: identifying, selecting, and refining topics for comparative effectiveness systematic reviews: AHRQ and the effective health-care program.

Authors:  Evelyn P Whitlock; Sarah A Lopez; Stephanie Chang; Mark Helfand; Michelle Eder; Nicole Floyd
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2009-06-21       Impact factor: 6.437

Review 4.  Expectations, validity, and reality in pharmacogenetics.

Authors:  Nita A Limdi; David L Veenstra
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2009-12-07       Impact factor: 6.437

5.  Stakeholder participation in comparative effectiveness research: defining a framework for effective engagement.

Authors:  Patricia A Deverka; Danielle C Lavallee; Priyanka J Desai; Laura C Esmail; Scott D Ramsey; David L Veenstra; Sean R Tunis
Journal:  J Comp Eff Res       Date:  2012-03       Impact factor: 1.744

6.  Personalized medicine and genomics: challenges and opportunities in assessing effectiveness, cost-effectiveness, and future research priorities.

Authors:  Rena Conti; David L Veenstra; Katrina Armstrong; Lawrence J Lesko; Scott D Grosse
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 2.583

7.  Cost effectiveness of lung-volume-reduction surgery for patients with severe emphysema.

Authors:  Scott D Ramsey; Kristin Berry; Ruth Etzioni; Robert M Kaplan; Sean D Sullivan; Douglas E Wood
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2003-05-20       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 8.  Building the evidence base for decision making in cancer genomic medicine using comparative effectiveness research.

Authors:  Katrina A B Goddard; William A Knaus; Evelyn Whitlock; Gary H Lyman; Heather Spencer Feigelson; Sheri D Schully; Scott Ramsey; Sean Tunis; Andrew N Freedman; Muin J Khoury; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2012-07       Impact factor: 8.822

9.  The Evaluation of Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention (EGAPP) Initiative: methods of the EGAPP Working Group.

Authors:  Steven M Teutsch; Linda A Bradley; Glenn E Palomaki; James E Haddow; Margaret Piper; Ned Calonge; W David Dotson; Michael P Douglas; Alfred O Berg
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  A formal risk-benefit framework for genomic tests: facilitating the appropriate translation of genomics into clinical practice.

Authors:  David L Veenstra; Joshua A Roth; Louis P Garrison; Scott D Ramsey; Wylie Burke
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 8.822

View more
  3 in total

1.  Effective stakeholder engagement: design and implementation of a clinical trial (SWOG S1415CD) to improve cancer care.

Authors:  Sarah Barger; Sean D Sullivan; Ari Bell-Brown; Brad Bott; Anne Marie Ciccarella; John Golenski; Mark Gorman; Judy Johnson; Karma Kreizenbeck; Florence Kurttila; Ginny Mason; Jamie Myers; Carole Seigel; James L Wade; Guneet Walia; Kate Watabayashi; Gary H Lyman; Scott D Ramsey
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2019-06-11       Impact factor: 4.615

2.  Adapting the nominal group technique for priority setting of evidence-practice gaps in implementation science.

Authors:  Nicole M Rankin; Deborah McGregor; Phyllis N Butow; Kate White; Jane L Phillips; Jane M Young; Sallie A Pearson; Sarah York; Tim Shaw
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2016-08-26       Impact factor: 4.615

3.  A Systematic Review of the Value Assessment Frameworks Used within Health Technology Assessment of Omics Technologies and Their Actual Adoption from HTA Agencies.

Authors:  Ilda Hoxhaj; Laurenz Govaerts; Steven Simoens; Walter Van Dyck; Isabelle Huys; Iñaki Gutiérrez-Ibarluzea; Stefania Boccia
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-10-30       Impact factor: 3.390

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.