ReviewGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2012
Building the evidence base for decision making in cancer genomic medicine using comparative effectiveness research.
Review in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
19 citing papers in PubMed.
- Precision Medicine and Big Data: The Application of an Ethics Framework for Big Data in Health and Research.Asian bioethics review · 2019Article
- Using the diffusion of innovations model to guide participant engagement in the genomics era.Journal of genetic counseling · 2019Article
- The Future of Precision Medicine: Potential Impacts for Health Technology Assessment.PharmacoEconomics · 2018Article
- Developing and evaluating polygenic risk prediction models for stratified disease prevention.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2016Review
- Economic Evaluation in Stratified Medicine: Methodological Issues and Challenges.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2016Article
- Evaluating the clinical impact of a genomic classifier in prostate cancer using individualized decision analysis.PloS one · 2015Article
- Causal Inference in the Age of Decision Medicine.Journal of data mining in genomics & proteomics · 2015Article
- Clinical implementation of germ line cancer pharmacogenetic variants during the next-generation sequencing era.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2014Review
- Issues surrounding the health economic evaluation of genomic technologies.Pharmacogenomics · 2013Review
- Stakeholder engagement: a key component of integrating genomic information into electronic health records.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2013Review
- Personalized screening for cancers: should we consider polygenic profiling?Personalized medicine · 2013Article
- Comparative effectiveness research in cancer genomics and precision medicine: current landscape and future prospects.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2013Article
- Comparative effectiveness research in cancer: what has been funded and what knowledge gaps remain?Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2013Article
- How can polygenic inheritance be used in population screening for common diseases?Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2013Review
- Comparative effectiveness research in oncology.The oncologist · 2013Article
- The arrival of genomic medicine to the clinic is only the beginning of the journey.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2013Article
- Getting our priorities straight: a novel framework for stakeholder-informed prioritization of cancer genomics research.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2013Article
- Comparative effectiveness research, genomics-enabled personalized medicine, and rapid learning health care: a common bond.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2012Review
- Knowledge integration at the center of genomic medicine.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The clinical utility is uncertain for many cancer genomic applications. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) can provide evidence to clarify this uncertainty. The aim of this study was to identify approaches to help stakeholders make evidence-based decisions and to describe potential challenges and opportunities in using CER to produce evidence-based guidance. We identified general CER approaches for genomic applications through literature review, the authors' experiences, and lessons learned from a recent, seven-site CER initiative in cancer genomic medicine. Case studies illustrate the use of CER approaches. Evidence generation and synthesis approaches used in CER include comparative observational and randomized trials, patient-reported outcomes, decision modeling, and economic analysis. Significant challenges to conducting CER in cancer genomics include the rapid pace of innovation, lack of regulation, and variable definitions and evidence thresholds for clinical and personal utility. Opportunities to capitalize on CER methods in cancer genomics include improvements in the conduct of evidence synthesis, stakeholder engagement, increasing the number of comparative studies, and developing approaches to inform clinical guidelines and research prioritization. CER offers a variety of methodological approaches that can address stakeholders' needs and help ensure an effective translation of genomic discoveries.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.