Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-dwq4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T20:15:03.018Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Resistance to Usefulness: Sociology and the Clinical Use of Genetic Tests

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 June 2008

Adam Hedgecoe
Adam Hedgecoe
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology, School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies, University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9QNUK E-mail: a.m.hedgecoe@sussex.ac.uk
Get access

Abstract

Drawing on previous research on geneticization and the clinical uptake of pharmacogenetics, this article argues for the use of the concept of clinical usefulness, in preference to the idea of clinical resistance to such testing. A general framework for clinical usefulness is sketched out, looking at how a number of features (clinicians’ knowledge, the differing interests of clinicians and researchers, how context influences the value of tests’ accuracy, the economic aspects of such tests and general cultural aspects of the clinic) influence how ‘useful’ a genetic or pharmacogenetic test will be seen to be by clinicians.

Keywords

APOE4Clinical UptakeGenetic TestPharmacogenetics
Type
Articles
Information
BioSocieties , Volume 3 , Issue 2 , June 2008 , pp. 183 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © London School of Economics and Political Science 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Akhtar, S. (2002). Pharmacogenomics: Are pharmacists ready for genotyped prescribing? Pharmaceutical Journal, 268, 296–299.Google Scholar
Bast, R.C., Ravdin, P., Hayes, D.F., Bates, S., Fritsche, H., Jessup, J.M. et al. (2001). 2000 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast and colorectal cancer: Clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 19 (6), 1865–1878.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borgaonkar, D.S., Schmidt, L.C., Martin, S.E., Kanzer, M.D., Edelsohn, L., Growdon, J. et al. (1993). Linkage of late-onset Alzheimer's disease with Apolipoprotein E Type-4 on Chromosome-19. Lancet, 342 (8871), 625–625.Google Scholar
Bosk, C. (2003 [1979]). Forgive and remember: Managing medical failure. Chicago: U Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodaty, H., Conneally, M., Gauthier, S., Jennings, C., Lennox, A., & Lovestone, S. (1995). Consensus statement on predictive testing for Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 9 (4), 182–187.Google ScholarPubMed
Buchanan, A., Califano, A., Kahn, J., McPherson, E., Robertson, J., & Brody, B. (2002). Report of the Consortium on Pharmacogenetics: Findings and recommendations. Minneapolis: Consortium on Pharmacogenetics.Google Scholar
Chasman, D.I., Posada, D., Subrahmanyan, L., Cook, N., Stanton, V., & Ridker, P. (2004). Pharmacogenetic study of statin therapy and cholesterol reduction. Journal of the American Medical Association, 291,2821–2827.Google Scholar
Craig, T.J. (1984). Overcoming clinicians’ resistance to computers. Hospital and Community Psychiatry, 35, 121–122.Google Scholar
Crentsil, V. (2004). The pharmacogenomics of Alzheimer's disease. Ageing Research Reviews, 3, 153–169.Google Scholar
Evans, W., & Johnson, J. (2001). Pharmacogenomics: The inherited basis for interindividual differences in drug response. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 2, 9–39.Google Scholar
Fargher, E.A., Tricker, K., Newman, W., Elliott, R., Roberts, S.A., & Shaffer, J.L. (2007). Current use of pharmacogenetic testing: A national survey of thiopurine methyltransferase testing prior to azathioprine prescription. Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics, 32, 187–195.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farrer, L., Brin, M., Elsas, L., Goate, A., Kennedy, J., Mayeux, R. et al. (1995). Statement on use of Apolipoprotein-E testing for Alzheimer disease. Journal of the American Medical Association, 274 (20), 1627–1629.Google Scholar
Finfgeld, D.L. (1999). Computer-assisted therapy: Harbinger of the 21st century? Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 13 (6), 303–310.Google Scholar
Grosse, S. & Khoury, M.J. (2006). What is the clinical utility of genetic testing? Genetics in Medicine, 8 (7), 448–450.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hardy, J. (2001). Genetic dissection of neurodegenerative disease. Clinical Neuroscience Research, 1, 134–141.Google Scholar
Hedgecoe, A. (2003). Expansion and uncertainty: Cystic fibrosis, classification and genetics. Sociology of Health and Illness, 25 (1), 50–70.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hedgecoe, A.M. (2004). The politics of personalised medicine—Pharmacogenetics in the clinic. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.Google Scholar
Hedgecoe, A.M. (2006a). Pharmacogenetics as alien science: Alzheimer's, core sets, and expectations. Social Studies of Science, 36 (5), 723–752.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedgecoe, A.M. (2006b). La maladie d'Alzheimer, les spécialistes et les débats éthiques sur les tests génétiques. Sciences Sociales et Santé, 24 (1), 57–82.Google Scholar
Hopkins, M., Ibarreta, D., Gaisser, S., Ezing, C., Ryan, J., Martin, P. et al. (2006). Putting pharmacogenetics into practice. Nature Biotechnology, 24 (4), 403–410.Google Scholar
Janssens, A.C., Gwin, M., Bradley, L.A., Oostra, B.A., van Duijn, C.M., & Khoury, M.J. (2008). A critical appraisal of the scientific basis of commercial genomic profile used to assess health risks and personalize health interventions. American Journal of Human Genetics, 82, 593–599.Google Scholar
Keen, H. (1985). Limitations and problems of diabetes classification from an epistemological point of view. In Vranic, M.Hollenberg, C.H.& Steiner, G.(Eds) Comparison of Type I and Type II diabetes: Similarities and dissimilarities in etiology, pathogenesis, and complications, 31–46. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Kerr, A. (2000). (Re)Constructing genetic disease: The clinical continuum between cystic fibrosis and male infertility. Social Studies of Science, 30 (6), 847–894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kerr, A. (2004). Giving up on geneticization: A comment on Hedgecoe's ‘Expansion and uncertainty: Cystic fibrosis, classification and genetics’. Sociology of Health and Illness, 26 (1), 1–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latimer, J., Featherstone, K., Atkinson, P., Clarke, A., Pilz, D.T., & Shaw, A. (2006). Rebirthing the clinic: The interaction of clinical judgment and genetic technology in the production of medical science. Science, Technology and Human Values, 31 (5), 599–630.Google Scholar
LeRoy, B.S. (2004). Alzheimer's disease and testing. Genetics in Medicine, 6 (4), 173–174.Google Scholar
Marshall, A. (1997). Getting the right drug into the right patient. Nature Biotechnology, 15, 1249–1252.Google Scholar
Marteau, T.M., Roberts, S., LaRusse, S., & Green, R.C. (2005). Predictive genetic testing for Alzheimer's disease: Impact upon risk perception. Risk Analysis, 25 (2), 397–404.Google Scholar
McConnell, L.M., Sanders, G.D., & Owens, D.K. (1999). Evaluation of genetic tests: APOE genotyping for the diagnosis of Alzheimer disease. Genetic Testing, 3 (1), 47–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKusick, V. (1969). Lumpers and splitters of the nosology of genetic disease. Birth Defects, 5, 23–32.Google Scholar
Miller, R.H. and Sim, I. (2004). Physicians’ use of electronic medical records: Barriers and solutions. Health Affairs, 23, 116–126.Google Scholar
Miller, F.A., Begbie, M.E., Giacomini, M., AhernC., C., & Harvey, E.A. (2006). Redefining disease? The nosologic implications of molecular genetic knowledge. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 49 (1), 99–114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Need, A.C., Motulsky, A.G., & Goldstein, D.B. (2005). Priorities and standards in pharmacogenetic research. Nature Genetics, 37 (7), 671–681.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noguchi, S., Murakami, K., & Yamada, N. (1993). Apolipoprotein-E genotype and Alzheimer's disease. Lancet, 342 (8873), 737.Google Scholar
Norman, D. (2002). The design of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Phillips, K.A., & Bebber, S.L. (2004). A systematic review of cost effectiveness analyses of pharmacogenomic interventions. Pharmacogenomics, 5 (8), 1–11.Google Scholar
Poirier, J., Davignon, J., Bouthillier, D., Kogan, S., Bertrand, P., & Gauthier, S. (1993). Apolipoprotein-E polymorphism and Alzheimers-disease. Lancet, 342 (8873), 697–699.Google Scholar
Poirier, J., Delisle, M.-C., Aubert, I., Farlow, M., Lahir, D., Hui, S. et al. (1995). Apolipoprotein E Allele as a predictor of cholinergic deficits and treatment outcome in Alzheimer disease. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 92, 12260–12264.Google Scholar
Poon, E.G., Blumenthal, D., Jaggi, T., Honour, M.M., Bates, D.W., & Kaushal, R. (2004). Overcoming the barriers to implementing computerized physician order entry systems in US hospitals: Perspectives from senior management. Health Affairs, 23, 184–190.Google Scholar
Roberts, J.S., Barber, M., Brown, T., Cupples, L.A., Farrer, L., LaRusse, S. et al. (2004). Who seeks genetic susceptibility testing for Alzheimer's disease? Findings from a multisite, randomized clinical trial. Genetics in Medicine, 6 (4), 197–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosenstein, B.J. (2002). Cystic fibrosis diagnosis: New dilemmas for an old disorder. Pediatric Pulmonology, 33, 83–84.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Roses, A.D. (1995). Apolipoprotein E genotyping in the differential diagnosis, not prediction of Alzheimer's disease. Annals of Neurology, 38 (1), 6–14.Google Scholar
Roses, A.D. (1998). A new paradigm for clinical evaluations of dementia: Alzheimer disease and Apolipoprotein E genotypes. In Post, S. and Whitehouse, P. (Eds), Genetic testing for Alzheimer disease: Ethical and clinical issues, 37–64.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP.Google Scholar
Saunders, A.M., Strittmatter, W.J., Schmechel, D., Georgehyslop, P.H.S., Pericakvance, M.A., Joo, S.H. et al. (1993). Association of Apolipoprotein E Allele ɛ4 with late-onset familial and sporadic Alzheimer's disease. Neurology, 43, 1467–1472.Google Scholar
Smart, A. (2006). A multi-dimensional model of clinical utility. International Journal for Quality in Health Care, 18 (5), 377–382.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trusheim, M.R., BerndtE.R., E.R., & Douglas, F.L. (2007). Stratified medicine: Strategic and economic implications of combining drugs and clinical biomarkers. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 6, 287–293.Google Scholar
Wedlund, P.J., & de Leon, J. (2001). Pharmacogenomic testing: The cost factor. Pharmacogenomics Journal, 1, 171–174.Google Scholar
Weinshilboum, R., & Wang, L. (2004). Pharmacogenomics: Bench to bedside. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 3, 739–748.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Witt, H. (2003). Chronic pancreatitis and cystic fibrosis. Gut, 52, ii31–ii41Google Scholar
Woelderink, A., Ibarreta, D., Hopkins, M.M., & Rodriguez-Cerezo, E. (2006). The current clinical practice of pharmacogenetic testing in Europe: TPMT and HER2 as case studies. Pharmacogenomics Journal, 6, 1–5.Google Scholar