Using patient-reported measurement to pave the path towards personalized medicine
Given the potential and importance of personalized or individualized medicine for health care delivery and its effects on patients’ quality of life, a plenary session was devoted to personalized medicine during the 19th Annual Conference of the International Society for Quality of Life Research held in October 2012 in Budapest, Hungary. This paper summarizes the three presentations and discusses their implications for quality-of-life research.
Reviews of the literature and presentation of empirical studies.
Personalized screening for breast cancer. To individualize screening and only target those women with an increased risk for breast cancer, researchers at the Karolinska Institutet in Stockholm perform a large population-based study to identify high-risk women based on lifestyle, genetics, mammographic morphology, and other markers as well as quality of life. Personalized support for treatment adherence. Inclusion of a simple, brief adherence measure into the clinical visit has demonstrated significant improvement in medication-taking behaviour and resultant improvement in health status. Personalized diagnosis of mental disorders. The DSM-5, the current manual for mental disorders, contains patient-based symptom and diagnosis severity measures that allow more individualized diagnosis than was hitherto possible.
Personalized medicine will continue to be increasingly applied and holds the potential to improve health outcomes including quality of life. At the same time, it will invite a host of new ethical, practical, and psychosocial questions. Further reflection and discussion of how our field can embrace and address these emerging challenges is needed.
KeywordsPersonalized medicine Screening Breast cancer Lifestyle change Adherence Psychiatric diagnosis DSM-5
- 1.Committee on Quality of Health Care in America. Institute of Medicine. (2001). Crossing the quality chasm: A new health system for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
- 4.Breast Cancer Statistics Online. (2013). Retrieved 12 March 2013 from http://www.worldwidebreastcancer.com/learn/breast-cancer-statistics-worldwide.
- 5.Gøtzsche, P. C., & Nielsen, M. (2011). Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1): CD001877. PMID: 21249649. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001877.pub4.
- 6.The Nordic Cochrane Centre. (2012). Mammography leaflet. Retrieved 12 March 2013 from http://www.cochrane.dk/.
- 7.Karolinska Mammography Project for Risk Prediction of Breast Cancer. (2013). Retrieved 12 March 2013 from http://karmastudy.org/.
- 8.Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., et al. (1993). For the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Study Group on Quality of Life: The EORTC QLQ–C30. A quality of life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 85, 365–367.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Fincham, J. (2007). Patient compliance with medications: Issues and opportunities. Binghamton, NY: Pharmaceutical Products Press.Google Scholar
- 14.Green, L. W., Kreuter, M. W., Deeds, S. G., & Partridge, K. B. (1980). Health education planning: A diagnostic approach (1st ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield.Google Scholar
- 15.Green, L., & Kreuter, M. (1999). Health promotion planning: An educational and ecological approach (3rd ed.). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing Company.Google Scholar
- 23.Morisky, D. E. (1986). Nonadherence to medical recommendations for hypertensive patients: Problem and potential solutions. Journal of Health Care Compliance, 1, 5–20.Google Scholar
- 25.American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
- 26.Narrow, W. E., Clarke, D. E., Kuramoto, S. J., Kraemer, H. C., Kupfer, D. J., Greiner, L., et al. (2013). DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, Part III: Development and reliability testing of a cross-cutting symptom assessment for DSM-5. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 71–82.Google Scholar
- 28.Regier, D. A., Narrow, W. E., Clarke, D. E., Kraemer, H. C., Kuramoto, S. J., Kuhl, E. A., et al. (2013). DSM-5 field trials in the United States and Canada, Part II: Test-retest reliability of selected categorical diagnoses. American Journal of Psychiatry, 170, 59–70.Google Scholar
- 30.Cella, D., Yount, S., Rothrock, N., Gershon, R., Cook, K., Reeve, B., et al. (2007). PROMIS Cooperative Group: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS): Progress of an NIH Roadmap cooperative group during its first two years. Medical Care, 45(1), S3–S11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 33.Diener, E., & Chan, M. Y. (2011). Happy people live longer: Subjective well-being contributes to health and longevity. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-being, 3(1), 1–43.Google Scholar
- 35.Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2010). Medical profiling and online medicine: The ethics of ‘personalized health care’ in a consumer age. London: Nuffield Council on Bioethics.Google Scholar
- 36.Hoerger, M., Epstein, R. M., Winters, P. C., Fiscella, K., Duberstein, P. R., Gramling, R., et al. (2013). Values and options in cancer care (VOICE): Study design and rationale for a patient-centered communication and decision-making intervention for physicians, patients with advanced cancer, and their caregivers. BMC Cancer, 13, 188. doi:10.1186/1471-2407-13-188.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Sprangers, M. A. G., Sloan, J. A., Veenhoven, R., Cleeland, C. S., Halyard, M. Y., Abertnethy, A. M., et al. (2009). The establishment of the GENEQOL consortium to investigate the genetic disposition of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 12, 301–311.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 38.Sprangers, M. A. G., Sloan, J. A., Barsevick, A., Chauhan, C., Dueck, A. C., Raat, H., et al. (2010). The GENEQOL consortium. Scientific imperatives, clinical implications, and theoretical underpinnings for the investigation of the relationship between genetic variables and patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes. Quality of Life Research, 19, 1395–1403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar