Literature DB >> 33385622

Industry, experts and the role of the 'invisible college' in the dissemination of non-invasive prenatal testing in the US.

Kelly Holloway1, Fiona Alice Miller2, Nicole Simms3.   

Abstract

Enthusiasm for so-called 'personalized' or 'precision' medicine has encouraged the growth of the molecular diagnostics industry and the proliferation of high-priced proprietary tests that can predict, diagnose or inform the treatment of diverse clinical conditions. Through a case study of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT), we explore how the mechanisms governing the development and dissemination of this novel prenatal screening test are most aptly understood as a 'regulatory regime.' We describe how private actors tied to the manufacturers of this test form a network of "experts" that contribute to the coordination of this regime by virtue of their efforts to navigate the governance of test adoption and also form spaces in which the standards governing test adoption are developed. We draw attention to private actors in this regime to demonstrate that they are a constitutive element of the public policy system governing biomedical innovation and adoption. Through this case study of NIPT we deepen our previous analysis of the role of consultants in navigating and shaping a regulatory regime (Holloway and Miller, 2020) and offer new insight about how scientists work with consultants to shape a regulatory regime that serves industry interests. Our work indicates that the private actors tied to the manufacturers of NIPT (experts employed by industry to court scientists and lobby payers, scientists collaborating with industry, key opinion leaders involved with clinical practice guidelines, lobbyists and consultants), constitute an 'invisible college' that navigates the governance of test adoption. The formations and negotiations over standards for NIPT identified in this paper comprise a new institutional norm: a polycentric regulatory regime permeated by commercial interests. The institutionalization of this regime has implications for accountability, transparency and test quality amidst a proliferation of new proprietary molecular tests.'
Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Keywords:  Commercial interests; Invisible college; Non-invasive prenatal testing; Precision medicine; Qualitative research

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 33385622     DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113635

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Soc Sci Med        ISSN: 0277-9536            Impact factor:   4.634


  3 in total

1.  Multidisciplinary perspectives on the regulation of diagnostic technologies.

Authors:  Stuart Hogarth; Fiona A Miller; Steve Sturdy
Journal:  Soc Sci Med       Date:  2022-06-14       Impact factor: 5.379

2.  False-positives and false-negatives in non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): what can we learn from a meta-analyses on > 750,000 tests?

Authors:  Thomas Liehr
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2022-08-19       Impact factor: 1.904

3.  Pandemic preparedness systems and diverging COVID-19 responses within similar public health regimes: a comparative study of expert perceptions of pandemic response in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden.

Authors:  Jakob Laage-Thomsen; Søren Lund Frandsen
Journal:  Global Health       Date:  2022-01-21       Impact factor: 4.185

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.