Personalized Medicine in the U.S. and Germany: Awareness, Acceptance, Use and Preconditions for the Wide Implementation into the Medical Standard

Abstract

The aim of our research was to collect comprehensive data about the public and physician awareness, acceptance and use of Personalized Medicine (PM), as well as their opinions on PM reimbursement and genetic privacy protection in the U.S. and Germany. In order to give a better overview, we compared our survey results with the results from other studies and discussed Personalized Medicine preconditions for its wide implementation into the medical standard. For the data collection, using the same methodology, we performed several surveys in Pennsylvania (U.S.) and Bavaria (Germany). Physicians were contacted via letter, while public representatives in person. Survey results, analyzed by means of descriptive and non-parametric statistic methods, have shown that awareness, acceptance, use and opinions on PM aspects in Pennsylvania and Bavaria were not significantly different. In both states there were strong concerns about genetic privacy protection and no support of one genetic database. The costs for Personalized Medicine were expected to be covered by health insurances and governmental funds. Summarizing, we came to the conclusion that for PM wide implementation there will be need to adjust the healthcare reimbursement system, as well as adopt new laws which protect against genetic misuse and simultaneously enable voluntary data provision.

Examining Users’ Adoption of Precision Medicine: The Moderating Role of Medical Technical Knowledge

“…Despite the potential benefits and the various PM initiatives in place, recent studies show that the adoption of this service remains insignificant, and many people know little about it. For example, one survey found that although most people in Pennsylvania and Bavaria had heard of PM and genetic testing, they knew little about PM technology and drugs [6]. Since PM developed later in China than in developed countries, such problems are more serious there.…”

The Public Perception of the Facilitators and Barriers to Implementing Personalized Medicine: A Systematic Review

“…A qualitative synthesis of the public opinion on the barriers and facilitators to implementation of PM are presented as three key themes (table 2) Familiarity and willingness to use personalized medicine A barrier that was a common finding was that participants were unfamiliar with what PM is and what it involves [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Eastman et al reported that only 16% of their participants from the public were familiar with the concept of PM ( [19].…”

“…A further facilitator is that participants thought that PM has the potential to improve efficacy of prescribed medication for patients [11-12, 17, 21-22, 26]. Five studies found that the public expected PM to lead to fewer ADR's than standard medicine [11,17,22,24,26]. Participants had an impression that PM would result in less trial and error prescribing, with one participant describing it as 'it's not as time consuming as it is if you keep going back and forth to the doctor trying to figure out what's gonna work' [24].…”

“…Participants had an impression that PM would result in less trial and error prescribing, with one participant describing it as 'it's not as time consuming as it is if you keep going back and forth to the doctor trying to figure out what's gonna work' [24]. A further perceived benefit of PM was that it could be an economic advantage to society with the potential for improved health, treatment efficacy and fewer ADRs [11,17].…”

ctDNA Detection in Microfluidic Platform: A Promising Biomarker for Personalized Cancer Chemotherapy

“…The identification of suitable cancer biomarker hinges the pathway towards tangible personalized medicine. The escalating personalized medicine in revolutionizing healthcare enables Journal of Sensors to deliver the right treatment for the right person at the right time for disease diagnosis screening, monitoring tumor progression, and drug resistance reactions [31]. Analysis of ctDNA as cancer biomarker is amenable for noninvasive liquid biopsy which gives quick access to tumor sample rather than conventional tissue biopsy which needed surgical examination of tumor tissue.…”