J Transl Med

ISSN:

国家:

Italy

影响因子:

SCIE收录情况:

JCR分区:

Valentina Soccodato; Valentina Soccodato; Antonio Sciurti; Marianna Riccio; Corrado De Vito; Maria Roberta De Blasiis; Claudia Isonne; Valentina Baccolini; Leonardo Maria Siena; Giuseppe Migliara; Annalisa Rosso; Ilaria Mussetto; Giuseppe La Torre; Arianna Anniballo; Paolo Villari; Francesco Pierri; Carolina Marzuillo; Giuseppe Di Lorenzo; Andrea Pistollato; Anna Ewa Kaminska; Jessica Iera
2025-07-07 相关链接

摘要

Background:
     
     Despite advances in precision medicine, the translation of genetic and genomic technologies into routine practice is hampered by a heterogeneous and limited evidence base and the absence of standardized evaluation methodologies. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) plays a critical role in bridging this gap, yet assessment approaches and comprehensiveness vary widely. This systematic review aims to map the landscape of the assessment reports on genetic and genomics applications, analyze their methodological aspects and identify gaps.
   

Methods:
     
     PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the international HTA database, were searched for assessment reports of genetic/genomic technologies. Information on reports general characteristics, assessment domains and their components, consulted sources of evidence and reported gaps was extracted. Findings were synthesized narratively.
   

Results:
     
     Out of 27,331 screened records, 41 reports were included, predominantly from Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia, mainly aimed at informing policy making for single or multiple gene tests for cancer patients. Most reports used a generic HTA methodology and assessment domains varied across reports. Key clinical aspects, such as clinical accuracy and safety, suffered from evidence gaps (39.0% and 22.0%), while personal and societal aspects were the least investigated assessment domain (48.8-78.0%). Overall, lack of evidence and limited generalizability of findings were the most commonly reported gaps across multiple domains.
   

Conclusions:
     
     The review highlighted significant fragmentation in current evaluation methodologies of genetic and genomic applications, with underassessment of analytical/clinical accuracy, safety, and non-health outcomes, alongside evidence gaps and limited generalizability. These issues compromise both evaluation and decision-making process, underscoring the urgent need for alternative study designs and standardized, comprehensive assessment frameworks to facilitate the successful implementation of emerging genetic and genomic technologies.
   

Genetic and genomic applications; Genetic and genomic technologies; Health technology assessment; Systematic review.

医教管理 ; 其他

混合人群

Not Available

除非特别说明,本系统中所有内容都受版权保护,并保留所有权利。