Oncotyrol – Center for Personalized Cancer Medicine: Methods and Applications of Health Technology Assessment and Outcomes Research

Siebert, Uwe; Jahn, Beate; Rochau, Ursula; Kisser, Agnes; Hunger, Theresa; Sroczynski, Gaby; Mühlberger, Nikolai; Willenbacher, Wolfgang; Schnaiter, Simon; Endel, Gottfried; Huber, Lukas A.; Gastl, Guenther

doi:10.1016/j.zefq.2015.06.012

Cited by 8 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…By contrast, Rogowski et al (2015) [38] reported the results of a series of structured workshops, organized by the International ONCOTYROL Expert Task Force [47], which supported the division of PM into physiology- and preference-based PM [38]. The first category, also termed ‘stratified medicine,’ refers to segmentation of patients according to their genetic makeup, while the second refers to the tailoring of treatment according to patients’ preferences.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personalized medicine in Europe: not yet personal enough?

Paolo

Sarkozy²,

Ryll

et al. 2017

BMC Health Serv Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundPersonalized medicine has the potential to allow patients to receive drugs specific to their individual disease, and to increase the efficiency of the healthcare system. There is currently no comprehensive overview of personalized medicine, and this research aims to provide an overview of the concept and definition of personalized medicine in nine European countries.MethodsA targeted literature review of selected health databases and grey literature was conducted to collate information regarding the definition, process, use, funding, impact and challenges associated with personalized medicine. In-depth qualitative interviews were carried out with experts with health technology assessment, clinical provisioning, payer, academic, economic and industry experience, and with patient organizations.ResultsWe identified a wide range of definitions of personalized medicine, with most studies referring to the use of diagnostics and individual biological information such as genetics and biomarkers. Few studies mentioned patients’ needs, beliefs, behaviour, values, wishes, utilities, environment and circumstances, and there was little evidence in the literature for formal incorporation of patient preferences into the evaluation of new medicines. Most interviewees described approaches to stratification and segmentation of patients based on genetic markers or diagnostics, and few mentioned health-related quality of life.ConclusionsThe published literature on personalized medicine is predominantly focused on patient stratification according to individual biological information. Although these approaches are important, incorporation of environmental factors and patients’ preferences in decision making is also needed. In future, personalized medicine should move from treating diseases to managing patients, taking into account all individual factors.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12913-017-2205-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personalized medicine in Europe: not yet personal enough?

Paolo

Sarkozy²,

Ryll

et al. 2017

BMC Health Serv Res

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This review focuses on diagnostic and treatment-related applications of germline genomic sequencing, despite its growing utility in other settings. The evidence base is expanding quickly for specialized applications, such as cell-free DNA sequencing for prenatal testing [ 91 , 92 ] and tumor sequencing for oncology care [ 68 , 93 , 94 , 95 , 96 ], not to mention epigenetic, RNA, and microbiome sequencing. Moreover, the utility of genomic sequencing may increase as understandings of gene-environment interactions improve.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing the Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of Genomic Sequencing

Christensen

Dukhovny

Siebert

et al. 2015

JPM

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite dramatic drops in DNA sequencing costs, concerns are great that the integration of genomic sequencing into clinical settings will drastically increase health care expenditures. This commentary presents an overview of what is known about the costs and cost-effectiveness of genomic sequencing. We discuss the cost of germline genomic sequencing, addressing factors that have facilitated the decrease in sequencing costs to date and anticipating the factors that will drive sequencing costs in the future. We then address the cost-effectiveness of diagnostic and pharmacogenomic applications of genomic sequencing, with an emphasis on the implications for secondary findings disclosure and the integration of genomic sequencing into general patient care. Throughout, we ground the discussion by describing efforts in the MedSeq Project, an ongoing randomized controlled clinical trial, to understand the costs and cost-effectiveness of integrating whole genome sequencing into cardiology and primary care settings.

show abstract

“…In fact, the vision of Personalised Cancer Medicine includes a future in which individual cancer patients are treated on the basis of personal factors, which means not only their clinical features and the molecular characteristics of their particular tumour, but also environmental information, and a patient's socio‐demographic characteristics and personal preferences. For this vision to become reality, scientific knowledge must disentangle the factors that contribute to predicting outcomes in order to differentiate between prevention and treatment strategies (Siebert et al., ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%