The Scientific Foundation for Personal Genomics: Recommendations from a National Institutes of Health–Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Multidisciplinary Workshop

Go to:

Abstract

The increasing availability of personal genomic tests has led to discussions about the validity and utility of such tests and the balance of benefits and harms. A multidisciplinary workshop was convened by the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to review the scientific foundation for using personal genomics in risk assessment and disease prevention and to develop recommendations for targeted research. The clinical validity and utility of personal genomics is a moving target with rapidly developing discoveries but little translation research to close the gap between discoveries and health impact. Workshop participants made recommendations in five domains: (1) developing and applying scientific standards for assessing personal genomic tests; (2) developing and applying a multidisciplinary research agenda, including observational studies and clinical trials to fill knowledge gaps in clinical validity and utility; (3) enhancing credible knowledge synthesis and information dissemination to clinicians and consumers; (4) linking scientific findings to evidence-based recommendations for use of personal genomics; and (5) assessing how the concept of personal utility can affect health benefits, costs, and risks by developing appropriate metrics for evaluation. To fulfill the promise of personal genomics, a rigorous multidisciplinary research agenda is needed.

Keywords: 

The Scientific Foundation for Personal Genomics: Recommendations from a National Institutes of Health–Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Multidisciplinary Workshop

Muin J. Khoury, MD, PhD,^1,2 Colleen M. McBride, PhD,³ Sheri D. Schully, PhD,² John P. A. Ioannidis, MD, PhD,⁴W. Gregory Feero, MD, PhD,³ A. Cecile J. W. Janssens, PhD,⁵ Marta Gwinn, MD, MPH,¹ Denise G. Simons-Morton, MD, PhD,⁶ Jay M. Bernhardt, PhD,⁷ Michele Cargill, PhD,⁸ Stephen J. Chanock, MD,² George M. Church, PhD,⁹Ralph J. Coates, PhD,¹ Francis S. Collins, MD, PhD,³ Robert T. Croyle, PhD,² Barry R. Davis, MD, PhD,¹⁰Gregory J. Downing, PhD, DO,¹¹ Amy DuRoss, MBA,⁸ Susan Friedman, DVM,¹² Mitchell H. Gail, PhD,²Geoffrey S. Ginsburg, MD, PhD,¹³ Robert C. Green, MD, MPH,¹⁴ Mark H. Greene, MD,² Philip Greenland, MD,¹⁵Jeffrey R. Gulcher, MD, PhD,¹⁶ Andro Hsu, PhD,¹⁷ Kathy L. Hudson, PhD,¹⁸ Sharon L. R. Kardia, PhD,¹⁹Paul L. Kimmel, MD,²⁰ Michael S. Lauer, MD,⁶ Amy M. Miller, PhD,²¹ Kenneth Offit, MD, MPH,²² David F. Ransohoff, MD,²³ J. Scott Roberts, PhD,²⁴ Rebekah S. Rasooly, PhD,²⁰ Kari Stefansson, MD,¹⁶ Sharon F. Terry, MA,²⁵Steven M. Teutsch, MD,²⁶ Angela Trepanier, MS,²⁷ Kay L. Wanke, PhD, MPH,²⁸ John S. Witte, PhD,²⁹ andJianfeng Xu, MD, DrPH³⁰

Author information ► Copyright and License information ► Disclaimer

The publisher's final edited version of this article is available at Genet Med

See other articles in PMC that cite the published article.