Abstract
For personalized medicine to be widely adopted in clinical practice, stakeholders need evidence of effectiveness, cost effectiveness and financial viability. Comparative effectiveness research (CER) using population based, retrospective data can inform personalized medicine. The purpose of this chapter is to explore the potential and the limitations of CER to advance personalized medicine. While the analytic methods and data used for CER overcome many of the disadvantages of randomized controlled trials, there are significant barriers, including lack of routinely collected genetic information, patient-reported outcomes and information on new and emerging technologies. Recommendations for using CER include augmenting current data with genetic information, promoting the collection of uniform health outcomes, using value of information analysis to guide development of new technologies, and greater use of decision analysis. In order to address stakeholder concerns regarding short term financial viability, additional emphasis should be devoted to cost analysis of implementation costs and overall financial impact. Finally, the movement to include more patient centered outcomes in regularly collected datasets used for CER will significantly advance personalized medicine.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Meckley L, Neuman P (2010) Personalized medicine: factors influencing reimbursement. Health Policy 94:91–100
Khoury M, Rich E, Randhawa G, Teutsch S, Niederhuber J (2009) Comparative effectiveness research and genomic medicine: an evolving partnership for the 21st century medicine. Genet Med 10:707–711
Davis J, Furstenthal L, Desai A, Norris T, Sutaria S, Fleming E, Ma P (2009) The microeconomics of personalized medicine: today’s challenge and tomorrow’s promise. Nat Rev Drug Discov 8:279–286
Deverka P (2009) Pharmacogenomics, evidence, and the role of payers. Public Health Genomics 12:149–157
Harmon A (2007) My genome, myself: seeking clues in DNA. New York Times November 17
Nellesen D, Birnbaum H, Greenberg P (2010) Perspectives on comparative effectiveness research: views from diverse constituencies. Pharmacoeconomics 28(10):789–798
Cook J, Hunter G, Vernon J (2009) The future costs, risks and rewards of drug development: the economics of pharmacogenomics. Pharmacoeconomics 27(5):355–363
Phillips KA, Liang SY, Van Bebbers S, Canpers Research Group (2008) Challenges to the translation of genomic information into clinical practice and health policy: utilization, preferences and economic value. Curr Opin Mol Ther 10(3):260–266
Garber A, Tunis S (2009) Does comparative effectiveness research threaten personalized medicine? N Eng J Med 360(19):1925–1927
Conti R, Veenstra D, Armstrong K, Lesko L, Grosse S (2010) Personalized medicine and genomics: challenges and opportunities in assessing effectiveness, cost effectiveness and future research priorities. Med Decis Mak 30(3):328–340
Epstein R, Teagarden J (2010) Comparative effectiveness research and personalized medicine: catalyzing or colliding? Pharmacoeconomics 28(10):905–913
Thomas A, Phillips A, Donnelly R, Piech CT (2010) Comparative effectiveness, personalized medicine and innovation: the path forward. Pharmacoeconomics 28(10):923–930
Congressional Budget Office (2007) Research on comparative effectiveness of medical treatments. http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/88xx/doc8891/12-18-ComparativeEffectiveness.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2012
Garrison L, Carlson R, Carlson J, Kuszler P, Meckley L, Veenstra D (2008) A review of public policy issues in promoting the development and commercialization of pharmacogenomics applications. Challenges and implications. Drug Metab Rev 40:377–401
McWilliams A, Lutter R, Nardinelli C (2008) Healthcare impact of personalized medicine using genetic testing: an exploratory analysis for warfarin. Personalized Med 5(3):281
Centers for Disease Prevention and Control (2010) Public health genomics. http://www.cdc.gov/genomics/gtesting. Accessed 20 July 2012
23 and Me (2010) Health reports complete list. https://www.23andme.com/health/all/. Accessed 20 July 2012
Ransohoff D, Khoury M (2009) Personal genomics: information can be harmful. Eur J Clin Invest 40:64–68
Grosse S, McBride C, Evans J, Khoury M (2009) Personal utility and genomic information: look before you leap. Genet Med 11(8):575–576
Rogowski W, Grosse S, Khoury M (2009) Challenges of translating genetic tests into clinical and public health practice. Nat Rev Genet 10:489–595
Mega JL, Close SL, Wiviott SD, Shen L, Hockett RD, Brandt JT, Walker JR, Antman EM, Macias W, Braunwald E, Sabatine MS (2009) Cytochrome P-450 polymorphisms and response to clopidogrel. N Engl J Med 360:354–362
Grossman I, Lutz M, Crenshaw D, Saunders AM, Burns DK, Roses AD (2010) Alzheimer’s disease: diagnostics, prognostics and the road to prevention. EPMA J 1(2):293–303
Panattoni L, Brown P, Te Ao B, Webster M, Gladding P (2012) Personalised thienopyridine therapy: the cost effectiveness of genetic testing for CYP2C19 variants to guide treatment in patients with acute coronary syndromes. Pharmacoeconomics (in press)
Holve E, Pittman P (2009) A first look at the volume and cost of comparative effectiveness research in the United States. AcademyHealth, Washington, DC
Rich EC (2009) The policy debate over public investment in comparative effectiveness research. J Gen Intern Med 24:752–757
111th Congress of the United States (2009) Conference Report to Accompany HR 1. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC
Wilensky GR (2009) The policies and politics of creating a comparative clinical effectiveness research center. Health Aff 28(4):w719–w729
Rich EC, Bonham A, Kirch D (2011) The implications of comparative effectiveness research for academic medicine. Acad Med 86(6):684–688
Goss C (2011) Comparative effectiveness research: what happened to incorporating costs of care? Am J Respir Crit Care Med 183:973–974
Krishna J (2011) Comparative effectiveness research: more than dollars and cents. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 183:975–976
Meltzer D, Basu A, Conti R (2010) The economics of comparative effectiveness studies. Pharmacoeconomics 28(10):843–853
Ramsey S, Venstra D, Tunis S, Garrison L, Crowley J, Baker L (2011) How comparative effectiveness research can help advance ‘Personalized Medicine’ in cancer treatment. Health Aff 30(12):2259–2268
Grosse S, Wordsworth S, Payne K (2008) Economic methods for valuing the outcomes of genetic testing: beyond cost-effectiveness analysis. Genet Med 10(9):648–654
Levy A, Mitton C, Johnston K, Harigan B, Briggs A (2010) International comparison of comparative effectiveness research in five jurisdictions: insights for the US. Pharmacoeconomics 28(10):813–830
Brown PM (2010) Personalized medicine and comparative effectiveness research in an era of fixed budgets. EPMA J 1:633–640
Acknowledgements
Thanks to Howard McLeod, Laura Panattoni, Pat Deverka, and participants at the Personalized Medicine Conference (Durham, NC, June 2010) for comments.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Brown, P.M. (2012). Effectiveness, Cost Effectiveness, and Financial Viability of Personalized Medicine: A Role for Comparative Effectiveness Research?. In: Costigliola, V. (eds) Healthcare Overview. Advances in Predictive, Preventive and Personalised Medicine, vol 1. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4602-2_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4602-2_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-4601-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-4602-2
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)