The concept of precision medicine aims to tailor treatment based on data unique to the patient. An example is the use of genetic data from malignant tumours to select the most appropriate oncological treatment. The competing interests of utilitarianism and egoism create dilemmas for decisions regarding investment in precision medicine. The need to balance the perceived rights and needs of individuals against those of society as a whole is an on-going challenge in the distribution of limited health service resources. There is need for proper planning, organisation and investment into precision medicine to cope with the consequences of both direct-to-consumer and healthcare-directed genetic testing for genetic counselling, therapeutics and diagnostic networks. Consideration needs to be given to providing adequate time and training to allow for meaningful shared decision-making with patients and there is a strong case in support of a hub-and-spoke model to provide rapid, solid tumour genetic mutational analysis to prevent patients missing out on beneficial treatments.
BrownNAAisnerDLOxnardGR.Precision medicine in non-small cell lung cancer: current standards in pathology and biomarker interpretation. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book2018;
38: 708–715.
2.
ThorntonS.Time to review utility of multidisciplinary team meetings. BMJ2015;
351: h5295.
3.
GilesC.Having both patient advoctaes and patients at the MDT meeting might be useful. BMJ2015;
351: h5285.
4.
General Medical Council (Great Britain). Good Medical Practice.
Manchester:
General Medical Council, 2013, p.32.
5.
TaylorCMunroAJGlynne-JonesR, et al.
Multidisciplinary team working in cancer: what is the evidence?BMJ2010;
340: c951.
6.
CouetNDesrochesSRobitailleH, et al.
Assessments of the extent to which health-care providers involve patients in decision making: a systematic review of studies using the OPTION instrument. Health Expect2013;
18: 542–561.
7.
Beach MC.Realizing shared decision making in practice. JAMA2019;
322: 811–812.
8.
PieterseAHStiggleboutAMMontoriVM.Shared decision-making and the importance of time. JAMA2019;
322: 25–26.
9.
BeauchampTLChildressJF.Principles of Biomedical Ethics. 7th ed.
New York and Oxford:
Oxford University, 2013, p.459.
10.
GillonR.Philosophical medical-ethics – Where respect for autonomy is not the answer. BMJ1986;
292: 48–49.
11.
SmithASpencerMG.Wealth of Nations.
Ware:
Wordsworth, 2012.
12.
HopeRA.Medical Ethics: A Very Short Introduction. Very Short Introduction 114.
Oxford and New York:
Oxford University Press, 2004, p.152.
13.
MillsJS.On Liberty.
London:
Longman, Roberts and Green, 1869.
14.
HessLMLouderAWinfreeK, et al.
Factors associated with adherence to and treatment duration of erlotinib among patients with non-small cell lung cancer. J Manag Care Spec Pharm2017;
23: 643–652.
15.
Joseph-WilliamsNElwynGEdwardsAG.Knowledge is not power for patients: A systematic review and thematic analysis of patient reported barriers and facilitators to shared decision-making. Patient Educ Couns2014;
94: 291–309.
HeathI.Back to the future: aspects of the NHS that should never change-an essay by Iona Heath. BMJ2018;
362: k3187.
18.
VetterNMatthewsI.Epidemiology and Public Health Medicine. Edinburgh and
New York:
Churchill Livingstone, 1999, p.258.
19.
BarrettARoquesTSmallM, et al.
How much will Herceptin really cost?BMJ2006;
333: 1118–1120.
20.
TsaoASScagliottiGVBunnPA, et al.
Scientific advances in lung cancer. J Thorac Oncol2016;
11: 613–638.
21.
ZhouCW, Wu YLChenG, et al.
Final overall survival results from a randomised, phase III study of erlotinib versus chemotherapy as fist treatment of EGFR mutation positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol2015;
26: 1877–1883.
22.
ZhouCW, Wu YLChenG, et al.
Erlotinib versus chemotherapy as first line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutation positive non-small cell lung cancer (OPTIMAL, CTONG-0802): a multicentre, open label, randomised, phase 3 study. Lancet Ocology2011;
12: 735–742.
23.
UrataYKatakamiNMoritaS, et al.
Randomized phase III study comparing gefitinib with erlotinib in patients with previously treated advanced lung adenocarcinoma: WJOG 5108L. J Clin Oncol2016;
34: 3248–3257.
24.
FukuokaMYanoSGiacconeG, et al.
Multi-institutional randomized phase II trial of gefitinib for previously treated patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (The IDEAL 1 Trial) [corrected]. J Clin Oncol2003;
21: 2237–2246.
25.
KrisMGNataleRBHerbstRS, et al.
Efficacy of gefitinib, an inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase, in symptomatic patients with non-small cell lung cancer – a randomized trial. JAMA2003;
290: 2149–2158.
26.
HerbstRSBaasPKimDW, et al.
Pembrolizumab versus docetaxel for previously treated, PD-L1-positive, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (KEYNOTE-010): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet2016;
387: 1540–1550.
27.
HollandS.Bioethics: A Philosophical Introduction.
Cambridge:
Polity Press, 2003, p.vi, 232.
28.
KondroWSibbaldB.Patient demand and politics push Herceptin forward. CMAJ2005;
173: 347–348.
29.
JacobsenMMSilversteinSCQuinnM, et al.
Timeliness of access to lung cancer diagnosis and treatment: a scoping literature review. Lung Cancer2017;
112: 156–164.
30.
DixonJ.Modernizing the NHS. Performance and productivity. BMJ2000;
320: 1462–1464.
31.
DixonJStreetAAllwoodD.Productivity in the NHS: why it matters and what to do next. BMJ2018;
363: k4301.
32.
Carter of Coles PRCB. Operational Productivity and Performance in English NHS Acute Hospitals: Unwarranted Variations. An Independent Report for the Department of Health by Lord Carter of Coles.
London:
Department of Health, 2016, p.87.
33.
YoungTBrailsfordSConnellC, et al.
Using industrial processes to improve patient care. BMJ2004;
328: 162–164.
34.
LambrosLUguenA.Toward a molecular diagnosis in a single day for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer2018;
19: e537–e538.
35.
BangYCutsemEFeyereislovaA, et al.
Trastuzumab in combination with chemotherapy vs chemotherapy alone for the treatment of HER-2 positive gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction cancer (ToGA): a phase 3, open label, randomised controlled trial. Lancet2010;
376: 687–697.
36.
GiacconeG.The role of gefitinib in lung cancer treatment. Clin Cancer Res2004;
10: 4233s–4237s.
37.
SohalDPRiniBIKhoranaAA, et al.
Prospective clinical study of precision oncology in solid tumors. J Natl Cancer Inst2015;
108: 332–334.
38.
MidhaADeardenSMcCormackR.EGFR mutation incidence in non-small-cell lung cancer of adenocarcinoma histology: a systematic review and global map by ethnicity (mutMapII). Am J Cancer Res2015;
5: 2892–2911.
39.
Sorrel T. The Insurance Market and Discriminatory Practices. In: Burley J and Harris J (eds) A Companion to Genetics. Oxford: Blackwell, 2002.
40.
BellcrossCAPagePZMeaney-DelmanD.Direct-to-consumer personal genome testing and cancer risk prediction. Cancer J2012;
18: 293–302.
41.
BorryPBentzenHBBudin-LjosneI, et al.
The challenges of the expanded availability of genomic information: an agenda-setting paper. J Community Genet2018;
9: 103–116.
42.
ParkerM.Ethical Problems and Genetic Practice.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2012.
43.
UdeskyL.The ethics of direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Lancet2010;
376: 1377–1378.
44.
McGuireALBurkeW.An unwelcome side effect of direct-to-consumer personal genome testing: raiding the medical commons. JAMA2008;
300: 2669–2671.
45.
HogarthSJavittGMelzerD.The current landscape for direct-to-consumer genetic testing: legal, ethical, and policy issues. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet2008;
9: 161–182.
46.
GraySWGollustSECarereDA, et al.
Personal genomic testing for cancer risk: results from the impact of personal genomics study. J Clin Oncol2017;
35: 636–644.
47.
CarereDAVanderWeeleTMorenoTA, et al.
The impact of direct-to-consumer personal genomic testing on perceived risk of breast, prostate, colorectal, and lung cancer: findings from the PGen study. BMC Med Genomics2015;
8: 63.
48.
McGuireALEvansBJCaulfieldT, et al.
Science and regulation. Regulating direct-to-consumer personal genome testing. Science2010;
330: 181–182.
49.
Schee Genannt HalfmannSEvangelatosNSchroder-BackP, et al.
European health care systems readiness to shift from ‘one-size fits all’ to personalised medicine. Per Med2017;
14: 63–74.
50.
NgeowJEngC.Precision medicine in heritable cancer: when somatic tumour testing and germline mutations meet. NPJ Genom Med2016;
1: 15006.
51.
LevyDEGarberJEShieldsAE.Guidelines for genetic risk assessment of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer: early disagreements and low utilization. J Gen Intern Med2009;
24: 822–828.
52.
NgeowJSesockKEngC.Breast cancer risk and clinical implications for germline PTEN mutation carriers. Breast Cancer Res Treat2017;
165: 1–8.
53.
StephensPJTarpeyPSDaviesH, et al.
The landscape of cancer genes and mutational processes in breast cancer. Nature2012;
486: 400–404.
54.
GoldsmithLJacksonLO’ConnorA, et al.
Direct-to-consumer genomic testing: systematic review of the literature on user perspectives. Eur J Hum Genet2012;
20: 811–816.
55.
ChadwickRFLevittMShickleD.The Right to Know and the Right Not to Know: Genetic Privacy and Responsibility. 2nd Edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014.
56.
GarrawayLA.Genomics-driven oncology: framework for an emerging paradigm. J Clin Oncol2013;
31: 1806–1814.
57.
ParkerM.Ethical Problems and Genetics Practice.
New York:
Cambridge University Press, 2012.
