Use of personalized medicine in the selection of patients for renal transplantation: views of Quebec transplant physicians and referring nephrologists

Communicating About Precision Transplantation Tools

Purpose of review

Precision tools that ensure molecular compatibility can help prevent rejection and improve kidney transplantation outcomes. However, these tools will generate controversy because they are perceived to and can in fact impact equity in the ethics of allocation. They may also affect the extent to which physicians can advocate for their patient fiduciaries, as generally required by Canadian professional ethics and law.

Sources of information

Electronic databases such as Google Scholar and PubMed were searched for peer-reviewed literature, and Google search engine was used to identify the news articles, jurisprudence, legal information, and other relevant websites cited.

Methods

We discuss controversies precision transplantation tools will likely generate, consider what challenges will arise from their implementation, and provide recommendations of avenues and content for communication to address these issues.

Key findings

Communication about the translation of new precision tools will be challenging as media portrayals of transplantation often focus on individual narratives about access to transplantation and fail to center the issues of utility, allocation, and rejection. Incomplete portrayals of this nature will need to be countered with explanations of how new precision tools can be of net benefit when implemented equitably, as maintaining trust in the donation and transplantation system is key.

Limitations

Our manuscript focuses on precision medicine applications pertaining to the implementation of molecular compatibility in transplantation. Distinct communication content and avenues may need to be considered in other contexts.

Implications

Clear, accurate, and strategic communication is key to managing translation of precision medicine tools. For this purpose, we provide detailed recommendations for stakeholder engagement, content, and avenues for communicating about precision transplantation tools.

Patients' and professionals' views related to ethical issues in precision medicine: a mixed research synthesis

BACKGROUND

Precision medicine development is driven by the possibilities of next generation sequencing, information technology and artificial intelligence and thus, raises a number of ethical questions. Empirical studies have investigated such issues from the perspectives of health care professionals, researchers and patients. We synthesize the results from these studies in this review.

METHODS

We used a systematic strategy to search, screen and assess the literature for eligibility related to our research question. The initial search for empirical studies in five data bases provided 665 different records and we selected 92 of these publications for inclusion in this review. Data were extracted in a spreadsheet and categorized into different topics representing the views on ethical issues in precision medicine.

RESULTS

Many patients and professionals expect high benefits from precision medicine and have a positive attitude towards it. However, patients and professionals also perceive some risks. Commonly perceived risks include: lack of evidence for accuracy of tests and efficacy of treatments; limited knowledge of patients, which makes informed consent more difficult; possible unavailability of access to precision medicine for underprivileged people and ethnic minorities; misuse of data by insurance companies and employers, potential of racial stigmatization due to genetic information; unwanted communication of incidental findings; changes in doctor-patient-relationship through focusing on data; and the problem that patients could feel under pressure to optimize their health.

CONCLUSIONS

National legislation and guidelines already minimize many risks associated with precision medicine. However, from our perspective some problems require more attention. Should hopes for precision medicine's benefits be fulfilled, then the ethical principle of justice would require an unlimited access to precision medicine for all people. The potential for autonomous patients' decisions must be greatly enhanced by improvements in patient education. Harm from test results must be avoided in any case by the highest possible data security level and communication guidelines. Changes in the doctor-patient relationship and the impact of precision medicine on the quality of life should be further investigated. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of precision medicine should be further examined, in order to avoid malinvestment.

Policy Challenges for Organ Allocation in an Era of "Precision Medicine"

There is increasing interest in the use of precision medicine tools and evidence-based outcome measures for donor-recipient matching to optimize transplant outcomes. Although the shift toward greater precision can provide health and resource benefits, it may be perceived as conflicting with both established equity-focused organ allocation norms and the legal and ethical obligations of health care providers and related institutions. With increasing evidence that various forms of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) mismatch and/or prognostic biomarkers can affect outcomes, the tension between maximizing utility and ensuring equity seems likely to intensify. In Canada, health care providers are generally required by law to put the interests of their patient, such as access to an organ, above the needs of the health care system and other patients. In addition, transplantation right of access lawsuits, which have been successful in the past, could affect the implementation of precision approaches. These legal tensions could be further heightened by media representations, which have historically favored strong rights of access. When implementing new precision technologies in organ allocation, there will be a recurrent need for policymakers to revisit the balance of equity and utility and to assess how to craft rules that reflect our society’s conception of a fair allocation system.

Stakeholder perspectives of the clinical utility of pharmacogenomic testing in solid organ transplantation

Aims: To assess stakeholder perspectives regarding the clinical utility of pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing following kidney, liver, and heart transplantation. Methods: We conducted individual semi-structured interviews and focus groups with kidney, liver, and heart transplantation patients and providers. We analyzed the qualitative data to identify salient themes. Results: The study enrolled 36 patients and 24 providers. Patients lacked an understanding about PGx, but expressed interest in PGx testing. Providers expressed willingness to use PGx testing, but reported barriers to implementation, such as lack of knowledge, lack of evidence demonstrating clinical utility, and patient healthcare burden. Conclusion: Patient and provider educational efforts, including foundational knowledge, clinical evidence, and applications to patient care beyond just immunosuppression, may be useful to facilitate the use of PGx testing in transplant medicine.