Making personalized medicine more affordable

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

Volumn 1346, Issue 1, 2015, Pages 81-89

  Aronson, Naomi ^a  

^a Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association   (United States)

Author keywords

Biomedical; Costs; Economics; Genetic testing; Individualized medicine; Patient centered; Technology assessment

Indexed keywords

FALSE POSITIVE RESULT; FOLLOW UP; GENETIC SCREENING; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; INCIDENTAL FINDING; NEXT GENERATION SEQUENCING; PERSONALIZED MEDICINE; COST OF ILLNESS; ECONOMICS; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HEALTH CARE COST; INVENTION; MEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; PATIENT CARE; TRENDS;

BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY; COST OF ILLNESS; EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE; GENETIC TESTING; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; INDIVIDUALIZED MEDICINE; INVENTIONS; PATIENT-CENTERED CARE;

EID: 84941794660     PISSN: 00778923     EISSN: 17496632     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1111/nyas.12614     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Garber, A.M. 2001. Evidence-based coverage policy. Health Aff. (Millwood) 20: 62-82.
2. Schully, S.D., T.K. Lam, W.D. Dotson, et al. 2014. Evidence synthesis and guideline development in genomic medicine: current status and future prospects. Genet. Med. doi: 10.1038/gim.2014.69.
3. Fryback, D.G. & J.R. Thornbury. 1991. The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. Med. Decis. Making 11: 88-94.
4. Haddow, J.E. & G.E. Palomaki. 2003. "ACCE: A Model Process for Evaluating Data on Emerging Genetic Tests." In Human Genome Epidemiology: A Scientific Foundation for Using Genetic Information to Improve Health and Prevent Disease. M. Khoury, J. Little & W. Burke, Eds.: 217-233. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
5. Green, R.C., J.S. Berg, W.W. Grody, et al. 2013. ACMG recommendations for reporting of incidental findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing. Genet. Med. 15: 565-574.
6. Timmermans, S. & A. Mauck. 2005. The promises and pitfalls of evidence-based medicine. Health Aff. (Millwood) 24: 18-28.
7. Horny, M., J.F. Burgess, Jr., J. Horwitt, et al. 2014. Advanced diagnostic imaging in privately insured patients: recent trends in utilization and payments. J. Am. Coll. Radiol. 11: 692-697.
8. McKinsey Global Institute. 2008. Accounting for the Cost of US Health Care: A New Look at Why Americans Spend More. New York City, NY: McKinsey & Company.
9. Gold, L.S., G. Klein, L. Carr, et al. 2012. The emergence of diagnostic imaging technologies in breast cancer: discovery, regulatory approval, reimbursement, and adoption in clinical guidelines. Cancer Imaging 12: 13-24.
10. United Health Center for Health Reform & Modernization. 2012. Personalized Medicine: Trends and Prospects for the New Science of Genetic Testing and Molecular Diagnostics. Minnetonka, MN: United Health Group.
11. Phillips, K.A., J.R. Trosman, R.K. Kelley, et al. 2014. Genomic sequencing: assessing the health care system, policy, and big-data implications. Health Aff. (Millwood) 33: 1246-1253.
12. Institute of Medicine. 2013. The Economics of Genomic Medicine: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
13. O'Donnell, J.C., S.V. Pham, C.L. Pashos, et al. 2009. Health technology assessment: lessons learned from around the world-an overview. Value Health 12(Suppl. 2): S1-S5.
14. Iglehart, J.K. 2009. Prioritizing comparative-effectiveness research-IOM recommendations. N. Engl. J. Med. 361: 325-328.
15. Seidenfeld, J., M. Piper, C. Flamm, et al. 2001. Epoetin treatment of anemia associated with cancer therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 93: 1204-1214.
16. PCORI (Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute) Methodology Committee. 2013. The PCORI Methodology Report. Washington, DC: PCORI.
17. McGlynn, E.A., S.M. Asch, J. Adams, et al. 2003. The quality of health care delivered to adults in the United States. N. Engl. J. Med. 348: 2635-2645.
18. Bristow, R.E., M.A. Powell, N. Al-Hammadi, et al. 2013. Disparities in ovarian cancer care quality and survival according to race and socioeconomic status. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 105: 823-832.
19. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2012. Vital signs: awareness and treatment of uncontrolled hypertension among adults-United States, 2003-2010. Morb. Mortal. Wkly. Rep. 61: 703-709.
20. Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute. 2012. National Priorities for Research and Research Agenda. Washington, DC: PCORI.
21. Gatsonis, C. 2012. Standards in the Design, Conduct and Evaluation of Diagnostic Testing For Use in Patient Centered Outcomes Research. Washington, DC: PCORI.
22. Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Technology Evaluation Center. 2011. Special report: companion diagnostics-example of BRAF gene mutation testing to select patients with melanoma for treatment with BRAF kinase inhibitors. Technology Evaluation Center Assessment Program. 26: 1-25.
23. Chang, S.M., D.B. Matchar, G.W. Smetana, et al. 2012. Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.
24. Febbo, P.G., M. Ladanyi, K.D. Aldape, et al. 2011. NCCN Task Force report: evaluating the clinical utility of tumor markers in oncology. J. Natl. Compr. Canc. Netw. 9(Suppl. 5): S1-S32; quiz S33.
25. Institute of Medicine. 2013. Observational Studies in a Learning Health System: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine.
26. Clinical Trial Service Unit and Epidemiological Studies Unit. EBCTCG (Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group). Cited August 21, 2014. https://www.ctsu.ox.ac.uk/research/meta-trials/ebctcg.
27. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group, R. Peto, C. Davies, et al. 2012. Comparisons between different polychemotherapy regimens for early breast cancer: meta-analyses of long-term outcome among 100, 000 women in 123 randomised trials. Lancet 379: 432-444.
28. Simon, R.M., S. Paik & D.F. Hayes. 2009. Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 101: 1446-1452.
29. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. 2009. Prescribing Information: ERBITUX® (cetuximab). Cited August 21, 2014. ImClone Systems Incorporated. http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2009/125084s168lbl.pdf.
30. Krumholz, H.M., J.S. Ross, C.P. Gross, et al. 2013. A historic moment for open science: the Yale University Open Data Access project and medtronic. Ann. Intern. Med. 158: 910-911.
31. Goodman, S. & K. Dickersin. 2011. Metabias: a challenge for comparative effectiveness research. Ann. Intern. Med. 155: 61-62.
32. Institute of Medicine. 2014. Strategies for Responsible Sharing of Clinical Trial Data. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
33. National Cancer Institute and National Institutes of Health. Biorepositories and biospecimens research branch. Cited August 21, 2014. http://biospecimens.cancer.gov/default.asp.
34. Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative. Publications. Cited August 21, 2014. http://www.ctti-clinicaltrials.org/briefing-room/publications.
35. Kramer, J.M., P.B. Smith & R.M. Califf. 2012. Impediments to clinical research in the United States. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 91: 535-541.
36. Center for Biomedical Innovation. 2014. NEWDIGS resources. Cited August 21, 2014. http://cbi.mit.edu/research-overview/newdigshomepage/newdigs-resources/.
37. Kaiser Family Foundation Health Tracking Poll. One quarter of public reports having problems paying medical bills, majority have delayed care due to cost. Cited August 22, 2014. http://kff.org/health-costs/slide/one-quarter-of-public-reports-having-problems-paying-medical-bills-majority-have-delayed-care-due-to-cost/.
38. Scher, H.I. 2000. HER2 in prostate cancer-a viable target or innocent bystander? J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 92: 1866-1868.
39. Trusheim, M.R. & E.R. Berndt. 2012. Economic challenges and possible policy actions to advance stratified medicine. Personalized Med. 9: 413-427.
40. Bach, P.B. 2009. Limits on Medicare's ability to control rising spending on cancer drugs. N. Engl. J. Med. 360: 626-633.