Cargando…
The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters
PURPOSE: The practice of “genomic” (or “personalized”) medicine requires the availability of appropriate diagnostic testing. Our study objective was to identify the reasons for health systems to bring next-generation sequencing into their clinical laboratories and to understand the process by which...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group
2014
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4262758/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25010053 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.60 |
_version_ | 1782348460627853312 |
---|---|
author | Crawford, James M. Bry, Lynn Pfeifer, John Caughron, Samuel K. Black-Schaffer, Stephen Kant, Jeffrey A. Kaufman, Jill H. |
author_facet | Crawford, James M. Bry, Lynn Pfeifer, John Caughron, Samuel K. Black-Schaffer, Stephen Kant, Jeffrey A. Kaufman, Jill H. |
author_sort | Crawford, James M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: The practice of “genomic” (or “personalized”) medicine requires the availability of appropriate diagnostic testing. Our study objective was to identify the reasons for health systems to bring next-generation sequencing into their clinical laboratories and to understand the process by which such decisions were made. Such information may be of value to other health systems seeking to provide next-generation sequencing testing to their patient populations. METHODS: A standardized open-ended interview was conducted with the laboratory medical directors and/or department of pathology chairs of 13 different academic institutions in 10 different states. RESULTS: Genomic testing for cancer dominated the institutional decision making, with three primary reasons: more effective delivery of cancer care, the perceived need for institutional leadership in the field of genomics, and the premise that genomics will eventually be cost-effective. Barriers to implementation included implementation cost; the time and effort needed to maintain this newer testing; challenges in interpreting genetic variants; establishing the bioinformatics infrastructure; and curating data from medical, ethical, and legal standpoints. Ultimate success depended on alignment with institutional strengths and priorities and working closely with institutional clinical programs. CONCLUSION: These early adopters uniformly viewed genomic analysis as an imperative for developing their expertise in the implementation and practice of genomic medicine. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4262758 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2014 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-42627582014-12-16 The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters Crawford, James M. Bry, Lynn Pfeifer, John Caughron, Samuel K. Black-Schaffer, Stephen Kant, Jeffrey A. Kaufman, Jill H. Genet Med Original Research Article PURPOSE: The practice of “genomic” (or “personalized”) medicine requires the availability of appropriate diagnostic testing. Our study objective was to identify the reasons for health systems to bring next-generation sequencing into their clinical laboratories and to understand the process by which such decisions were made. Such information may be of value to other health systems seeking to provide next-generation sequencing testing to their patient populations. METHODS: A standardized open-ended interview was conducted with the laboratory medical directors and/or department of pathology chairs of 13 different academic institutions in 10 different states. RESULTS: Genomic testing for cancer dominated the institutional decision making, with three primary reasons: more effective delivery of cancer care, the perceived need for institutional leadership in the field of genomics, and the premise that genomics will eventually be cost-effective. Barriers to implementation included implementation cost; the time and effort needed to maintain this newer testing; challenges in interpreting genetic variants; establishing the bioinformatics infrastructure; and curating data from medical, ethical, and legal standpoints. Ultimate success depended on alignment with institutional strengths and priorities and working closely with institutional clinical programs. CONCLUSION: These early adopters uniformly viewed genomic analysis as an imperative for developing their expertise in the implementation and practice of genomic medicine. Nature Publishing Group 2014-12 2014-07-10 /pmc/articles/PMC4262758/ /pubmed/25010053 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.60 Text en Copyright © 2014 American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ This work is licensed. under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/ |
spellingShingle | Original Research Article Crawford, James M. Bry, Lynn Pfeifer, John Caughron, Samuel K. Black-Schaffer, Stephen Kant, Jeffrey A. Kaufman, Jill H. The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters |
title | The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters |
title_full | The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters |
title_fullStr | The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters |
title_full_unstemmed | The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters |
title_short | The business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters |
title_sort | business of genomic testing: a survey of early adopters |
topic | Original Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4262758/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25010053 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/gim.2014.60 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT crawfordjamesm thebusinessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT brylynn thebusinessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT pfeiferjohn thebusinessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT caughronsamuelk thebusinessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT blackschafferstephen thebusinessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT kantjeffreya thebusinessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT kaufmanjillh thebusinessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT crawfordjamesm businessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT brylynn businessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT pfeiferjohn businessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT caughronsamuelk businessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT blackschafferstephen businessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT kantjeffreya businessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters AT kaufmanjillh businessofgenomictestingasurveyofearlyadopters |