No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 January 2025
The last decade has witnessed a steady adoption of personalized medicine. However, the evaluation of genetic and genomic tests is not straightforward. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify health technology assessment (HTA) reports assessing genetic and genomic tests to summarize the methodologies used, the maturity level of the evidence included, and the highlighted research gaps.
The PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were searched for HTA reports of genetic or genomic tests. The main national and international HTA report repositories (e.g., the international HTA database) were also searched. HTA reports that were specifically created to assess genetic or genomic technologies and included at least three core evaluation components (analytic validity, clinical validity, clinical utility, economic evaluation, organizational aspects, or ethical, legal, and social implications) were included. This study was supported by the European Commission and the Ministry for Universities and Research under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (M4C2-I1.3 Project PE_00000019 “HEAL ITALIA”).
Overall, 27,331 unique records were retrieved, 55 of which were included in the systematic review. The reports were mainly from Australia (29%), Canada (27%), and the UK (25%); focused on pharmacogenomics (36%) and oncology (35%); and investigated test use for treatment guidance (42%) or diagnosis (29%). The most reported evaluation components were economic evaluation (87%), clinical utility (76%), and clinical validity (67%). On the other hand, personal utility (7%), patients’ perspectives (27%), and ethical (15%), legal (11%), and social (24%) implications were poorly represented. Analytical validity, safety, and organizational aspects were included in about half of the reports.
Although these are only preliminary results, the substantial lack of a shared standard in the evaluation of genetic and genomic applications is clear given the heterogeneity of the dimensions addressed among the reports. Theres is a need to strengthen evaluation of the neglected dimensions, which are often of primary importance in defining the value and risks of personalized medicine.
To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.
To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.
To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.