This is either a genetically-engineered protein with the potential to save millions of lives, or the molecular structure of a highly toxic nerve agent-- so help me I've lost my notes and can't remember which.
They say we share more DNA in common with other species than with each other. If there’s any chance it means I’m not related to this guy, I’m all in favor. Having said that, you need to patent your own double-helix my friends, because personalized medicine is the wave of the future. According to this Special Report from Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News (did you get your copy yet this month?) the cost-saving potential of just three demonstration projects might exceed $6.2 Billion per year.
For example, according to the study’s authors “Genomic Health’s Oncotype Dx is a test with compelling cost-saving potential. It is used to predict chemotherapy benefit for patients who have node-negative, estrogen receptor positive (node-, ER+) breast cancer. By averting unnecessary chemotherapy, the test has been shown to save about $2,000 per patient. Extending this cost savings to the roughly 100,000 new cases of node-, ER+ breast cancer in the U.S. each year, this test could save the U.S. healthcare system up to approximately $200 million a year.”
The report continues, “Genentech/Roche’s Avastin costs $50–$100,000 per year of treatment but works in fewer than 50% of patients. Given that Avastin may generate $12 billion in peak sales, this low rate of efficacy translates into billions of dollars in misdirected healthcare spending. A test for Avastin response, such as that in discovery by BG Medicine, could save the system as much as $6 billion per year if all nonresponders could be removed from the treatment pool. Assuming that a test of this sort is introduced at the beginning of 2013 and is 100% adopted, cumulative savings of $40 billion could be realized by 2019. This scenario, in which a drug with high sales but low efficacy is targeted by diagnostics companies, may become a pattern in the near future, multiplying cost savings.”
October 11th, 2009 at 9:49 AM
Hi Pop, the idea of testing people in order to save them money by custom-tailoring their drugs would be beneficial if you didn’t leave out the malicious side of the coin: these same tests can exclude people from insurance coverage if their DNA shows a high risk of developing certain diseases in the first place! The whole idea of DNA testing for inheritable diseases (”Would you want to know…?”) is a thorny topic, and I’m not sure I know how I would answer that one!
October 17th, 2009 at 3:34 PM
I would take Personalized Medicine over impersonalized medicine any day, which is what we have now! For some reason, this story reminds me of implantable bio-chips, like we put in our pets; or those RFID’s they put in high-ranking Mexican officials to discourage kidnappings. I don’t know if you’ve read about medical tattoos, for instance insulin-dependent diabetics who get a certain internationally-known symbol tattooed on their wrists so if they were found unconscious anywhere in the world, medical professionals could instantly surmise why.