ReviewJournal of personalized medicine2013
Understanding the economic value of molecular diagnostic tests: case studies and lessons learned.
Review in Journal of personalized medicine, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Financing and Reimbursement Models for Personalised Medicine: A Systematic Review to Identify Current Models and Future Options.Applied health economics and health policy · 2022Pooled it
- A Strategy to Support Efficient Development and Use of Innovations in Personalized Medicine and Precision Medicine.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2019Article
- Lessons Learned When Introducing Pharmacogenomic Panel Testing into Clinical Practice.Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research · 2017Article
- Article
- Can genomic medicine improve financial sustainability of health systems?Molecular diagnosis & therapy · 2015Review
- Assessing value of innovative molecular diagnostic tests in the concept of predictive, preventive, and personalized medicine.The EPMA journal · 2015Review
- Co-development of diagnostic vectors to support targeted therapies and theranostics: essential tools in personalized cancer therapy.Frontiers in oncology · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Ten years after completion of the Human Genome Project, progress towards making "personalized medicine" a reality has been slower than expected. The reason is twofold. Firstly, the science is more difficult than expected. Secondly, limited progress has been made in aligning economic incentives to invest in diagnostics. This paper develops nine case studies of "success" where diagnostic tests are bringing personalized medicine into clinical practice with health and economic impact for patients, healthcare systems, and manufacturers. We focus on the availability of evidence for clinical utility, which is important not only for clinicians but also for payers and budget holders. We find that demonstrating diagnostic clinical utility and the development of economic evidence is currently feasible (i) through drug-diagnostic co-development, and (ii) when the research is sponsored by payers and public bodies. It is less clear whether the diagnostic industry can routinely undertake the work necessary to provide evidence as to the clinical utility and economic value of its products. It would be good public policy to increase the economic incentives to produce evidence of clinical utility: otherwise, opportunities to generate value from personalized medicine-in terms of both cost savings and health gains-may be lost.
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.