In reading the Holmes et al paper “Fulfilling the Promise of Personalized Medicine? Systematic Review and Field Synopsis of Pharmacogenetic Studies” I would like you to think about some questions:
- The paper discusses the “excitement” surrounding pharamacogenomics, but points out that a large volume of these papers are reviews, rather than primary research articles. Why is this a problem? Why do you think it is happening. What reasons do the authors give?
- What would make a clinical study “A primary pharmacogenetic” study?
- On page 12, the autors state “As more reliable information begins to emerge on alleles influencing drug response from larger, better designed whole genome and candidate gene studies, focus will need to shift to the critical evaluation of the predictive performance of genetic tests in clinical practice, including studies of cost-effectiveness.” What does this mean? What are the authors expecting to happen in the field? Why is “more reliable information” emerging?
- Pick any of the authors “Recommendations for Future Research in Pharmacogenetics” and explain what it means, using examples.