Evidence-based medicine and big genomic data.

Genomic and other related big data (Big Genomic Data, BGD for short) are ushering a new era of precision medicine. This overview discusses whether principles of evidence-based medicine hold true for BGD and how they should be operationalized in the current era. Major evidence-based medicine principles include the systematic identification, description and analysis of the validity and utility of BGD, the combination of individual clinical expertise with individual patient needs and preferences, and the focus on obtaining experimental evidence, whenever possible. BGD emphasize information of single patients with an overemphasis on N-of-1 trials to personalize treatment. However, large-scale comparative population data remain indispensable for meaningful translation of BGD personalized information. The impact of BGD on population health depends on its ability to affect large segments of the population. While several frameworks have been proposed to facilitate and standardize decision making for use of genomic tests, there are new caveats that arise from BGD that extend beyond the limitations that were applicable for more simple genetic tests. Non-evidence-based use of BGD may be harmful and result in major waste of healthcare resources. Randomized controlled trials will continue to be the strongest arbitrator for the clinical utility of genomic technologies, including BGD. Research on BGD needs to focus not only on finding robust predictive associations (clinical validity) but also more importantly on evaluating the balance of health benefits and potential harms (clinical utility), as well as implementation challenges. Appropriate features of such useful research on BGD are discussed.

[1]  E H Shortliffe,et al.  Watson for Oncology and breast cancer treatment recommendations: agreement with an expert multidisciplinary tumor board , 2018, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[2]  Kenneth D. Mandl,et al.  The Evolution of Patient Diagnosis: From Art to Digital Data-Driven Science , 2017, JAMA.

[3]  B. Shirts,et al.  Knowledge for Precision Medicine: Mechanistic Reasoning and Methodological Pluralism. , 2017, JAMA.

[4]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  How to survive the medical misinformation mess , 2017, European journal of clinical investigation.

[5]  D. Absher,et al.  Impact of a Genetic Risk Score for Coronary Artery Disease on Reducing Cardiovascular Risk: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Study , 2017, Front. Cardiovasc. Med..

[6]  Muin J Khoury,et al.  No Shortcuts on the Long Road to Evidence-Based Genomic Medicine. , 2017, JAMA.

[7]  Kathryn A Phillips,et al.  Making genomic medicine evidence-based and patient-centered: a structured review and landscape analysis of comparative effectiveness research , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[8]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Ethics and Epistemology in Big Data Research , 2017, Journal of Bioethical Inquiry.

[9]  David A. Chambers,et al.  The current state of implementation science in genomic medicine: opportunities for improvement , 2017, Genetics in Medicine.

[10]  Robert C. Green,et al.  Direct-to-Consumer Genetic Testing: User Motivations, Decision Making, and Perceived Utility of Results , 2017, Public Health Genomics.

[11]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  A manifesto for reproducible science , 2017, Nature Human Behaviour.

[12]  S. Terry An Evidence Framework for Genetic Testing. , 2017, Genetic testing and molecular biomarkers.

[13]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Opportunities and challenges in developing risk prediction models with electronic health records data: a systematic review , 2017, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[14]  S. Sharp,et al.  Lifestyle Advice Combined with Personalized Estimates of Genetic or Phenotypic Risk of Type 2 Diabetes, and Objectively Measured Physical Activity: A Randomized Controlled Trial , 2016, PLoS Medicine.

[15]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  What Happens When Underperforming Big Ideas in Research Become Entrenched? , 2016, JAMA.

[16]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Why Most Clinical Research Is Not Useful , 2016, PLoS medicine.

[17]  G. Collins,et al.  Prediction models for cardiovascular disease risk in the general population: systematic review , 2016, British Medical Journal.

[18]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Clinical Genomics: From Pathogenicity Claims to Quantitative Risk Estimates. , 2016, JAMA.

[19]  T. Marteau,et al.  The impact of communicating genetic risks of disease on risk-reducing health behaviour: systematic review with meta-analysis , 2016, British Medical Journal.

[20]  R. Green,et al.  Incorporating a Genetic Risk Score Into Coronary Heart Disease Risk Estimates: Effect on Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels (the MI-GENES Clinical Trial). , 2016, Circulation.

[21]  Steven Piantadosi,et al.  Patient-centric trials for therapeutic development in precision oncology , 2015, Nature.

[22]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  An overview of recommendations and translational milestones for genomic tests in cancer , 2014, Genetics in Medicine.

[23]  F. Collins,et al.  A new initiative on precision medicine. , 2015, The New England journal of medicine.

[24]  J. Ioannidis,et al.  Does screening for disease save lives in asymptomatic adults? Systematic review of meta-analyses and randomized trials. , 2015, International journal of epidemiology.

[25]  J. Ioannidis Clinical trials: what a waste , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[26]  John P. A. Ioannidis,et al.  Big data meets public health , 2014, Science.

[27]  F. Frueh,et al.  Molecular diagnostics clinical utility strategy: a six-part framework , 2014, Expert review of molecular diagnostics.

[28]  J. Doroshow,et al.  Molecular analysis for therapy choice: NCI MATCH. , 2014, Seminars in oncology.

[29]  John P A Ioannidis,et al.  Diagnostic tests often fail to lead to changes in patient outcomes. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[30]  Euan A Ashley,et al.  Clinical interpretation and implications of whole-genome sequencing. , 2014, JAMA.

[31]  Marc S. Williams,et al.  The EGAPP initiative: lessons learned , 2013, Genetics in Medicine.

[32]  Christopher H. Schmid,et al.  Single-patient (n-of-1) trials: a pragmatic clinical decision methodology for patient-centered comparative effectiveness research. , 2013, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[33]  R. Green,et al.  Personalized Genetic Risk Counseling to Motivate Diabetes Prevention , 2012, Diabetes Care.

[34]  Ralf Schulze,et al.  The efficacy of diagnostic imaging. , 2012, Dento maxillo facial radiology.

[35]  Abdul V. Roudsari,et al.  Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators , 2012, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[36]  Paul Glasziou,et al.  Using N-of-1 Trials to Improve Patient Management and Save Costs , 2010, Journal of General Internal Medicine.

[37]  Development and description of GETT: a Genetic testing Evidence Tracking Tool , 2010, Clinical chemistry and laboratory medicine.

[38]  L. Gluud Bias in clinical intervention research. , 2006, American journal of epidemiology.

[39]  D. Sackett,et al.  Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't , 1996, BMJ.

[40]  E. Larson,et al.  Randomized clinical trials in single patients during a 2-year period. , 1993, JAMA.

[41]  David M. Eddy,et al.  Practice Policies—Guidelines for Methods , 1990 .

[42]  D M Eddy,et al.  Clinical decision making: from theory to practice. Practice policies--guidelines for methods. , 1990, JAMA.

[43]  G. Guyatt,et al.  A clinician's guide for conducting randomized trials in individual patients. , 1988, CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne.