Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Nov;12(11):686-93.
doi: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181eff533.

A formal risk-benefit framework for genomic tests: facilitating the appropriate translation of genomics into clinical practice

David L Veenstra  1 , Joshua A Roth, Louis P Garrison Jr, Scott D Ramsey, Wylie Burke
Affiliations

A formal risk-benefit framework for genomic tests: facilitating the appropriate translation of genomics into clinical practice

David L Veenstra et al. Genet Med. 2010 Nov.

Abstract

Purpose: Evaluation of genomic tests is often challenging because of the lack of direct evidence of clinical benefit compared with usual care and unclear evidence requirements. To address these issues, this study presents a risk-benefit framework for assessing the health-related utility of genomic tests.

Methods: We incorporated approaches from a variety of established fields including decision science, outcomes research, and health technology assessment to develop the framework. Additionally, we considered genomic test stakeholder perspectives and case studies.

Results: We developed a three-tiered framework: first, we use decision-analytic modeling techniques to synthesize data, project incidence of clinical events, and assess uncertainty. Second, we defined the health-related utility of genomic tests as improvement in health outcomes as measured by clinical event rates, life expectancy, and quality-adjusted life-years. Finally, we displayed results using a risk-benefit policy matrix to facilitate the interpretation and implementation of findings from these analyses.

Conclusion: A formal risk-benefit framework may accelerate the utilization and practice-based evidence development of genomic tests that pose low risk and offer plausible clinical benefit, while discouraging premature use of tests that provide little benefit or pose significant health risks compared with usual care.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Schematic diagram of disease-based model
Figure 2
Figure 2
Warfarin Pharmacogenomics Decision Tree
Figure 3
Figure 3
Risk-Benefit Policy Matrix
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: genetic testing strategies in newly diagnosed individuals with colorectal cancer aimed at reducing morbidity and mortality from Lynch syndrome in relatives. Genet Med. 2009;11(1):35–41. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: can UGT1A1 genotyping reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with irinotecan? Genet Med. 2009;11(1):15–20. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: can tumor gene expression profiling improve outcomes in patients with breast cancer? Genet Med. 2009;11(1):66–73. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Recommendations from the EGAPP Working Group: testing for cytochrome P450 polymorphisms in adults with nonpsychotic depression treated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Genet Med. 2007;9(12):819–25. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Khoury MJ, McBride CM, Schully SD, et al. The Scientific Foundation for personal genomics: recommendations from a National Institutes of Health-Centers for Disease Control and Prevention multidisciplinary workshop. Genet Med. 2009;11(8):559–67. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types