A horizon-prioritizing method can identify gaps among genomic application guidelines

L. Li

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

In light of the increasing need by decision makers for a method of evaluating genomic applications based on the weight of evidence for their efficacy, several agencies have developed systems of classification. Here I review the horizon-scanning method for prioritizing genomics applications as described by Dotson et al. in this issue of CPT. Using the examples of the authors' Tier 1/Green classification for KRAS and Tier 2/Yellow for TPMT, I discuss differences between the guidelines issued by the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and those by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Additionally, I offer suggestions regarding classification of the Tier 3/Red genomics applications and the reproducibility of the data-curating algorithm of the horizon-scanning method.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)368-369
Number of pages2
JournalClinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
Volume95
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 2014

Fingerprint

Guidelines
Genomics
Pharmacogenetics
Weights and Measures
Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pharmacology
  • Pharmacology (medical)

Cite this

A horizon-prioritizing method can identify gaps among genomic application guidelines. / Li, L.

In: Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Vol. 95, No. 4, 04.2014, p. 368-369.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{61ac087017fc4a1da24ef824fff93734,
title = "A horizon-prioritizing method can identify gaps among genomic application guidelines",
abstract = "In light of the increasing need by decision makers for a method of evaluating genomic applications based on the weight of evidence for their efficacy, several agencies have developed systems of classification. Here I review the horizon-scanning method for prioritizing genomics applications as described by Dotson et al. in this issue of CPT. Using the examples of the authors' Tier 1/Green classification for KRAS and Tier 2/Yellow for TPMT, I discuss differences between the guidelines issued by the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and those by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Additionally, I offer suggestions regarding classification of the Tier 3/Red genomics applications and the reproducibility of the data-curating algorithm of the horizon-scanning method.",
author = "L. Li",
year = "2014",
month = "4",
doi = "10.1038/clpt.2014.16",
language = "English",
volume = "95",
pages = "368--369",
journal = "Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics",
issn = "0009-9236",
publisher = "Nature Publishing Group",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A horizon-prioritizing method can identify gaps among genomic application guidelines

AU - Li, L.

PY - 2014/4

Y1 - 2014/4

N2 - In light of the increasing need by decision makers for a method of evaluating genomic applications based on the weight of evidence for their efficacy, several agencies have developed systems of classification. Here I review the horizon-scanning method for prioritizing genomics applications as described by Dotson et al. in this issue of CPT. Using the examples of the authors' Tier 1/Green classification for KRAS and Tier 2/Yellow for TPMT, I discuss differences between the guidelines issued by the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and those by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Additionally, I offer suggestions regarding classification of the Tier 3/Red genomics applications and the reproducibility of the data-curating algorithm of the horizon-scanning method.

AB - In light of the increasing need by decision makers for a method of evaluating genomic applications based on the weight of evidence for their efficacy, several agencies have developed systems of classification. Here I review the horizon-scanning method for prioritizing genomics applications as described by Dotson et al. in this issue of CPT. Using the examples of the authors' Tier 1/Green classification for KRAS and Tier 2/Yellow for TPMT, I discuss differences between the guidelines issued by the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and those by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). Additionally, I offer suggestions regarding classification of the Tier 3/Red genomics applications and the reproducibility of the data-curating algorithm of the horizon-scanning method.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897910017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897910017&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1038/clpt.2014.16

DO - 10.1038/clpt.2014.16

M3 - Article

VL - 95

SP - 368

EP - 369

JO - Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics

JF - Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics

SN - 0009-9236

IS - 4

ER -