Personalized Medicine: Impact on Patient Care in Genetic Counseling

Improving the quality of 'personalized medicine' research and practice: through an ethical lens

The evolving vision for personalized medicine (PM) implies a systems approach to the re-organization of healthcare and how we define the boundary between care and research. Calls for scaling PM up to a systems level requires a broad definition of quality not restricted to how the different elements of the system perform (e.g., laboratory quality control, biomarker prediction, biobanking, information systems, data sharing and security, and clinical outcomes) but how these elements work together to optimize population relevant quality indicators - effectiveness, affordability, system sustainability, public confidence and accessibility. Examples of PM-associated information technologies and innovative clinical evaluation methods with a focus on cancer medicine are provided to demonstrate how quality and ethics are inextricably linked to a PM systems approach. While current, traditional ethical standards sometimes challenge the PM approach, PM is challenging us to review ethical standards and improve ethical frameworks to meet new and future realities.

Pre-test genetic counseling services for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer delivered by non-genetics professionals in the state of Florida

Genetic counseling and testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer now includes practitioners from multiple healthcare professions, specialties, and settings. This study examined whether non-genetics professionals (NGPs) perform guideline-based patient intake and informed consent before genetic testing. NGPs offering BRCA testing services in Florida (n = 386) were surveyed about clinical practices. Among 81 respondents (response rate = 22%), approximately half reported: sometimes scheduling a separate session for pre-test counseling lasting 11-30 min prior to testing, discussing familial implications of testing, benefits and limitations of risk management options, and discussing the potential psychological impact and insurance-related issues. Few constructed a three-generation pedigree, discussed alternative hereditary cancer syndromes, or the meaning of a variant result. This lack of adherence to guideline-based practice may result in direct harm to patients and their family members. NGPs who are unable to deliver guideline adherent cancer genetics services should focus on identification and referral of at-risk patients to in person or telephone services provided by genetics professionals.