Cargando…
The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets?
Sole-source business models for genetic testing can create private databases containing information vital to interpreting the clinical significance of human genetic variations. But incomplete access to those databases threatens to impede the clinical interpretation of genomic medicine. National heal...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3658186/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23150081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2012.217 |
_version_ | 1782270229197357056 |
---|---|
author | Cook-Deegan, Robert Conley, John M Evans, James P Vorhaus, Daniel |
author_facet | Cook-Deegan, Robert Conley, John M Evans, James P Vorhaus, Daniel |
author_sort | Cook-Deegan, Robert |
collection | PubMed |
description | Sole-source business models for genetic testing can create private databases containing information vital to interpreting the clinical significance of human genetic variations. But incomplete access to those databases threatens to impede the clinical interpretation of genomic medicine. National health systems and insurers, regulators, researchers, providers and patients all have a strong interest in ensuring broad access to information about the clinical significance of variants discovered through genetic testing. They can create incentives for sharing data and interpretive algorithms in several ways, including: promoting voluntary sharing; requiring laboratories to share as a condition of payment for or regulatory approval of laboratory services; establishing – and compelling participation in – resources that capture the information needed to interpret the data independent of company policies; and paying for sharing and interpretation in addition to paying for the test itself. US policies have failed to address the data-sharing issue. The entry of new and established firms into the European genetic testing market presents an opportunity to correct this failure. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3658186 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36581862013-06-01 The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? Cook-Deegan, Robert Conley, John M Evans, James P Vorhaus, Daniel Eur J Hum Genet Policy Sole-source business models for genetic testing can create private databases containing information vital to interpreting the clinical significance of human genetic variations. But incomplete access to those databases threatens to impede the clinical interpretation of genomic medicine. National health systems and insurers, regulators, researchers, providers and patients all have a strong interest in ensuring broad access to information about the clinical significance of variants discovered through genetic testing. They can create incentives for sharing data and interpretive algorithms in several ways, including: promoting voluntary sharing; requiring laboratories to share as a condition of payment for or regulatory approval of laboratory services; establishing – and compelling participation in – resources that capture the information needed to interpret the data independent of company policies; and paying for sharing and interpretation in addition to paying for the test itself. US policies have failed to address the data-sharing issue. The entry of new and established firms into the European genetic testing market presents an opportunity to correct this failure. Nature Publishing Group 2013-06 2012-11-14 /pmc/articles/PMC3658186/ /pubmed/23150081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2012.217 Text en Copyright © 2013 Macmillan Publishers Limited http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Policy Cook-Deegan, Robert Conley, John M Evans, James P Vorhaus, Daniel The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? |
title | The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? |
title_full | The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? |
title_fullStr | The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? |
title_full_unstemmed | The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? |
title_short | The next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? |
title_sort | next controversy in genetic testing: clinical data as trade secrets? |
topic | Policy |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3658186/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23150081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2012.217 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT cookdeeganrobert thenextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets AT conleyjohnm thenextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets AT evansjamesp thenextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets AT vorhausdaniel thenextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets AT cookdeeganrobert nextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets AT conleyjohnm nextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets AT evansjamesp nextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets AT vorhausdaniel nextcontroversyingenetictestingclinicaldataastradesecrets |