Only connect: personal genomics and the future of American medicine

Genetics and primary care: where are we headed?

Since first sequencing the human genome in 2003, emerging genetic/genomic technologies have ushered in a revolutionary era of medicine that purports to bridge molecular biology and clinical care. The field of translational medicine is charged with mediating this revolution. Sequencing innovations are far outpacing guidelines intended to ease their practice-based applications, including in primary care. As a result, genomic medicine’s full integration in primary care settings especially, has been slow to materialize. Researchers and clinicians alike face substantial challenges in navigating contentious ethical issues raised in translation and implementation, namely preserving the spirit of whole-person approaches to care; maintaining respect for persons and communities; and translating genetic risk into clinical actionability. This commentary therefore explores practical barriers to, and ethical implications of, incorporating genomic technologies in the primary care sector. These ethical challenges are both philosophical and infrastructural. From a primary care perspective, the commentary further reviews the ethical, legal and social implications of the Center for Disease Control’s proposed model for assessing the validity and utility of genomic testing and family health history applications. Lastly, the authors provide recommendations for future translational initiatives that aim to maximize the capacities of genomic medicine, without compromising primary care philosophies and foundations of practice.

One community's effort to control genetic disease

In 1989, we established a small community health clinic to provide care for uninsured Amish and Mennonite children with genetic disorders. Over 20 years, we have used publicly available molecular data and sophisticated technologies to improve diagnostic efficiency, control laboratory costs, reduce hospitalizations, and prevent major neurological impairments within a rural underserved community. These actions allowed the clinic's 2010 operating budget of $1.5 million to save local communities an estimated $20 to $25 million in aggregate medical costs. This exposes an unsettling fact: our failure to improve the lot of most people stricken with genetic disease is no longer a matter of scientific ignorance or prohibitive costs but of choices we make about how to implement existing knowledge and resources.