Rather than seek to distinguish hype from legitimate promise, it may be more helpful to think about personalised medicine as embodying a promissory economy which serves both to mobilize resources for research and — partly at least — to determine the ends to which that research is directed. Personalised medicine is a development of the larger promissory economy of medical biotechnology. As such, it systematically conflates public benefit with the pursuit of commercial and especially pharmaceutical interests. (...) Consequently, research and development in personalised medicine tends to favour the production of expensive new treatments over unprofitable forms of prevention or more effective use of older therapies. A rebalancing of research priorities is needed to favour the pursuit of public benefit, even when it does not deliver private profits. This will in turn require sustained reflection, self-criticism and often self-denial on the part of public research funders and the scientists they support. (shrink)

This is a volume of twelve essays concerning the fundamental tension in personalised medicine between individual choice and the common good.

In recent years we have seen the emergence of “personalised medicine.” This development can be seen as the logical product of reductionism in medical science in which disease is increasingly understood in molecular terms. Personalised medicine has flourished as a consequence of the application of neoliberal principles to health care, whereby a commercial and social need for personalised medicine has been created. More specifically, personalised medicine benefits from the ongoing commercialisation of the (...) body and of genetic knowledge, the idea that health is defined by genetics, and the emphasis the state places on individual citizens as being “responsible for” their own health. In this paper I critique the emergence of personalised medicine by examining the ways in which it has already impacted upon health and health care delivery. (shrink)

Die öffentliche Diskussion um die „personalisierte Medizin“ legt nahe, dass mit diesem medizinischen Ansatz hohe Erwartungen an einen Beitrag zur klinischen Versorgung verbunden werden. Über die Wahrnehmungen und Bewertungen klinisch tätiger Ärzte ist jedoch wenig bekannt. Die vorliegende qualitative Interviewstudie gibt einen Einblick bezüglich des Einflusses „personalisierter Medizin“ auf die klinische Praxis aus ärztlicher Perspektive. Die Ärzte im vorliegenden Sample nehmen „personalisierte Medizin“ zwar als einen medizinischen Fortschritt wahr, sehen allerdings keine grundsätzliche Veränderung der bisherigen medizinischen Praxis. Als zentrales Problem (...) wird die Handhabung und Verwertung von molekulargenetischen Informationen für Diagnose und Therapie in der klinischen Praxis thematisiert. In Anbetracht der Ergebnisse muss infrage gestellt werden, ob „personalisierte Medizin“ nicht das Gegenteil von dem, was ihr Name nahe legt – eine personenorientiertere Medizin – bewirkt. Die Strategien im Umgang mit den Informationsmassen produzieren selbst neue Herausforderungen, die ein Hindernis für eine personenorientierte Medizin darstellen könnten. (shrink)

Personalised medicine has been discussed as a medical paradigm shift that will improve health while reducing inefficiency and waste. At the same time, it raises new practical, regulatory, and ethical challenges. In this paper, we examine PM strategies epistemologically in order to develop capacities to address these challenges, focusing on a recently proposed strategy for developing patient-specific models from induced pluripotent stem cells so as to make individualised treatment predictions. We compare this strategy to two main PM strategies—stratified (...) medicine and computational models. Drawing on epistemological work in the philosophy of medicine, we explain why these two methods, while powerful, are neither truly personalised nor, epistemologically speaking, novel strategies. Both are forms of correlational black box. We then argue that the iPSC models would count as a new kind of black box. They would not rely entirely on mechanistic knowledge, and they would utilise correlational evidence in a different way from other strategies—a way that would enable personalised predictions. In arguing that the iPSC models would present a novel method of gaining evidence for clinical practice, we provide an epistemic analysis that can help to inform the practical, regulatory, and ethical challenges of developing an iPSC system. (shrink)

This book presents the views of leading researchers from across Europe and North America, from both normative and empirical disciplines, in the multidisciplinary debate on the current state of research on the ethical, legal and social implications of personalised medicine. The work partially draws on a four year collaborative research project funded by the German Ministry for Education and Research, and at a time when future health care is a topic of much discussion this book provides valuable policy (...) recommendations for the way forward. (shrink)

The idea of personalised medicine (PM) has gathered momentum recently, attracting funding and generating hopes as well as scepticism. As PM gives rise to differing interpretations, there have been several attempts to clarify the concept. In an influential paper published in this journal, Schleidgen and colleagues have proposed a precise and narrow definition of PM on the basis of a systematic literature review. Given that their conclusion is at odds with those of other recent attempts to understand PM, (...) we consider whether their systematic review gives them an edge over competing interpretations. We have found some methodological weaknesses and questionable assumptions in Schleidgen and colleagues’ attempt to provide a more specific definition of PM. Our perplexities concern the lack of criteria for assessing the epistemic strength of the definitions that they consider, as well as the logical principles used to extract a more precise definition, the narrowness of the pool from which they have drawn their empirical data, and finally their overlooking the fact that definitions depend on the context of use. We are also worried that their ethical assumption that only patients’ interests are legitimate is too simplistic and drives all other stakeholders’ interests—including those that are justifiable—underground, thus compromising any hope of a transparent and fair negotiation among a plurality of actors and interests. As an alternative to the shortcomings of attempting a semantic disciplining of the concept we propose a pragmatic approach. Rather than considering PM to be a scientific concept in need of precise demarcation, we look at it as an open and negotiable concept used in a variety of contexts including at the level of orienting research goals and policy objectives. We believe that since PM is still more an ideal than an achieved reality, a plurality of visions is to be expected and we need to pay attention to the people, reasons and interests behind these alternative conceptions. In other words, the logic and politics of PM cannot be disentangled and disagreements need to be tackled addressing the normative and strategic conflicts behind them. (shrink)

Governments are investing in precision medicine with the aim of improving healthcare through the use of genomic analyses and data analytics to develop tailored treatment approaches for individual patients. The success of PM is contingent upon clear public communications that engender trust and secure the social licence to collect and share large population-wide data sets because specific consent for each data re-use is impractical. Variation in the terminology used by different programmes used to describe PM may hinder clear communication (...) and threaten trust. Language is used to create common understanding and expectations regarding precision medicine between researchers, clinicians and the volunteers. There is a need to better understand public interpretations of PM-related terminology. This paper reports on a qualitative study involving 24 focus group participants in the multi-lingual context of Singapore. The study explored how Singaporeans interpret and understand the terms ‘precision medicine’ and ‘personalised medicine’, and which term they felt more aptly communicates the concept and goals of PM. Results suggest that participants were unable to readily link the terms with this area of medicine and initially displayed preferences for the more familiar term of ‘personalised’. The use of visual aids to convey key concepts resonated with participants, some of whom then indicated preferences for the term ‘precision’ as being a more accurate description of PM research. These aids helped to facilitate dialogue around the ethical and social value, as well as the risks, of PM. Implications for programme developers and policy makers are discussed. (shrink)

‘The fundamental tension between the individualistic promises of personalized medicine and the demands of social justice,’ is this volume’s organizing theme. This tension is captured b...

One of the key features of the contemporary data economy is the widespread circulation of data and its interoperability. Critical data scholars have analysed data repurposing practices and other factors facilitating the travelling of data. While this approach focused on flows provides great potential, in this article we argue that it tends to overlook questions of attachment and belonging. Drawing upon ethnographic fieldwork within a Danish data-linkage infrastructure, and building upon insights from archival science, we discuss the work of data (...) practitioners enabling the repurposing of pathology samples extracted from patients for the conduct of ‘personal medicine’ – our term to discuss the so-called old-fashioned treatment of patients – towards personalised medicine. This first involves ‘getting to know’ the tissues and unpacking their previous uses and meanings, then detaching them from their original source to extract data from such tissues and making them flow towards a new container where they can be worked on and connected with other data. As data practitioners make these tissues travel, transforming them into research data, they organise the attachments of data to new agendas, persons and places. Crucially, in our case, we observe the prominence of national attachments, whereby managing tissues and data in and out of containers involves tying them to the nation to serve its interests. We thus expose how the building of data linkage infrastructures entails more than the accumulation and curation of data, but also involves crafting meanings, futures and belonging to specific communities and territories. (shrink)

Background Biomedicine, i.e. the application of basic sciences to medicine, has become the cornerstone for the study of etiopathogenesis and treatment of diseases. Biomedicine has enormously contributed to the progress of medicine and healthcare and has become the preferred approach to medical problems in the West. The developments in statistical inference and machine learning techniques have provided the foundation for personalised medicine where clinical management can be fully informed by biomedicine. The deployment of precision medicine (...) may impact the autonomy and self-normativity of the patients. Understanding the relationship between biomedicine and medical practice can help navigate the benefits and challenges offered by precision medicine. Methods Conventional content analysis was applied to “Le Normal and le Pathologique” (Canguilhem G. The Normal and the Pathological. Princeton: Princeton University Press; 1991) and further investigated with respect to its relationship with techne and precision medicine using PubMed and Google Scholar and the Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy to search for the following keywords singularly or in combination: “Canguilhem”, “techne”, “episteme”, “precision medicine”, “machine learning AND medicine”. Results The Hippocratic concept of techne accounts for many characteristics of medical knowledge and practice. The advances of biomedicine, experimental medicine and, more recently, machine learning offer, in contrast, the model of a medicine based purely on episteme. I argue that Canguilhem medical epistemology establishes a framework where episteme and data-driven medicine is compatible with the promotion of patient’s autonomy and self-normativity. Conclusions Canguilhem’s medical epistemology orders the relationship of applied medicine with experimental sciences, ethics and social sciences. It provides guidance to define the scope of medicine and the boundaries of medicalization of healthy life. Finally, it sets an agenda for a safe implementation of machine learning in medicine. (shrink)

Expectations play a major role in ‘driving’ biotechnology research and development. However, their ethical significance has been largely overlooked. This article examines the dynamics and ethics of expectations surrounding biotechnologies, focusing on biobanks and the promise of personalised medicines. It explores the personal and social implications of expectations, especially where technologies fail to eventuate. The article identifies the claims and practices that support the expectations pertaining to biotechnologies and some of the factors that work against the fulfilment of predicted (...) innovations. It is argued that the role of expectations in shaping thinking and action needs to be taken seriously by those who are concerned about the ethical implications of biotechnologies. (shrink)

The concept of medical necessity plays a central role in many healthcare systems, including Canada's, by helping determine which healthcare services will receive funding. Despite its significance in health policy frameworks, medical necessity has proven to be notoriously difficult to define and operationalise. A shift toward a more personalised and genetically‐informed approach to the provision of healthcare seems likely to heighten associated policy challenges. One of the stated goals of personalised medicine is to save healthcare systems money (...) by facilitating the use of less and more effective treatments. However, any cost saving potential may ultimately be thwarted by physicians' legal and ethical obligations, given that physicians will inevitably be required to implement and define the bounds of genetically‐informed medical necessity for their patients. (shrink)

This paper examines potential ethical and legal issues arising during the research, develop- ment and clinical use of a proposed strategy in personalized medicine (PM): using human induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC)-derived tissue cultures as predictive models of individ- ual patients to inform treatment decisions. We focus on epilepsy treatment as a likely early application of this strategy, for which early-stage stage research is underway. In relation to the research process, we examine issues associated with biological samples; data; health; (...) vulnerable populations; neural organoids; and what level of accuracy justifies using the iPSC-derived neural tissue system. In relation to clinical use, we examine potential uses in pre-natal screening, and effects on clinical decision-making. Although our focus is providing recommendations for researchers developing work in this area, we identify the novel issue of deciding on an acceptable accuracy level for the system. We also emphasize an issue thus far neglected in the ethics of PM: PM tends to represent treatment decisions as though they should be directed solely by biomedical information, but this in itself could be detri- mental to best personalizing treatment decisions in the clinic. (shrink)

Forschungs- und Therapieansätze einer „personalisierten Medizin“ erhalten gegenwärtig große Aufmerksamkeit und Förderung in Forschung, Wirtschaft und Politik und erwecken große Hoffnungen. Auf der Grundlage molekulargenetischer Biomarker soll ein zielgerichtetes, stratifiziertes Vorgehen im Bereich der Prävention, Diagnostik und Therapie erreicht werden. Häufig wird der Begriff „personalisierte Medizin“ als Synonym für medizinischen Fortschritt überhaupt benutzt und eine persönlichere, bessere und kostengünstigere Medizin versprochen. 1) Fortschritte in der genetischen Forschung können nicht mit besseren medizinischen Behandlungsmöglichkeiten für eine Vielzahl von Patienten gleichgesetzt werden. In (...) Wirklichkeit beschränken sich die aktuellen Fortschritte einer an genetischen Biomarkern ausgerichteten Diagnostik und Therapie auf Untergruppen von Patienten. Die Mehrheit der Kranken hat bisher keinen Vorteil. 2) Der Begriff „personalisierte Medizin“ ist unangemessen und irreführend. Vielmehr handelt es sich um eine auf genetischen Biomarkern basierte stratifizierende Medizin und nicht um eine patienten- oder personenzentrierte Medizin. 3) Die sog. „personalisierte Medizin“ ist ein stark forschungs- und industriegetriebener Bereich der Medizin. Globale Stakeholder bestimmen die Entwicklung, unabhängig finanzierte Forschung gibt es kaum. Daher besteht die Gefahr, dass wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisgewinn durch wirtschaftliche Einzelinteressen behindert wird. Empirische Erfahrungen, z. B. der Preisentwicklung neuer Krebsmedikamente, zeigen, dass das Versprechen der Kostenersparnis jeder Evidenz entbehrt. 4) Die hohen Investitionen in die „personalisierte Medizin“ werfen wichtige ethische Fragen nach Opportunitätskosten und Prioritätensetzungen im öffentlichen Gesundheitswesen auf. Derzeit profitieren wenige Patientengruppen von den hohen Forschungs- und Behandlungskosten der „personalisierten Medizin.“ Gleichzeitig bleiben Forschung und Versorgung in anderen wichtigen medizinischen Bereichen unterfinanziert. Eine öffentliche Debatte über die Prioritäten in medizinischer Forschung und Versorgung sowie darüber, wie diese in demokratischen Gesellschaften und in öffentlichen Gesundheitssystemen umgesetzt werden können, ist erforderlich. Eine an genetischen Biomarkern ausgerichtete sog. „personalisierte Medizin“ führt nicht zu einer persönlicheren Behandlung des einzelnen Patienten und ist von einer personen- oder patientenzentrierten Medizin zu unterscheiden. Von den bisherigen Therapiefortschritten profitieren Untergruppen von Patienten, z. B. in der Onkologie. Für die Mehrheit der Patienten konnten keine Verbesserungen erzielt werden. Für eine Kostenersparnis im Gesundheitswesen fehlt jegliche empirische Evidenz, vielmehr muss nach bisherigen Erfahrungen mit Kostensteigerungen gerechnet werden. (shrink)

In light of the successful occupation of the term ‘person’ for Personalised Medicine, it is necessary to ask what different notions of personhood practically imply. This article examines two. The first is the reductionist molecular individual, embraced by PM enthusiasts. Here the person is a contradictory dividuum, oscillating between increased autonomy and a new, infantilising tech-paternalism. The second relies on a Christ-analogical distinction of two modes. The dramatic amplitude of personal absence-presence then unfolds throughout time. This provides the (...) logic or spirit of the medical act. Drawing on the ethics of war, it will be recast as an arduous task of mending. (shrink)

Forschungs- und Therapieansätze einer „personalisierten Medizin“ erhalten gegenwärtig große Aufmerksamkeit und Förderung in Forschung, Wirtschaft und Politik und erwecken große Hoffnungen. Auf der Grundlage molekulargenetischer Biomarker soll ein zielgerichtetes, stratifiziertes Vorgehen im Bereich der Prävention, Diagnostik und Therapie erreicht werden. Häufig wird der Begriff „personalisierte Medizin“ als Synonym für medizinischen Fortschritt überhaupt benutzt und eine persönlichere, bessere und kostengünstigere Medizin versprochen. 1) Fortschritte in der genetischen Forschung können nicht mit besseren medizinischen Behandlungsmöglichkeiten für eine Vielzahl von Patienten gleichgesetzt werden. In (...) Wirklichkeit beschränken sich die aktuellen Fortschritte einer an genetischen Biomarkern ausgerichteten Diagnostik und Therapie auf Untergruppen von Patienten. Die Mehrheit der Kranken hat bisher keinen Vorteil. 2) Der Begriff „personalisierte Medizin“ ist unangemessen und irreführend. Vielmehr handelt es sich um eine auf genetischen Biomarkern basierte stratifizierende Medizin und nicht um eine patienten- oder personenzentrierte Medizin. 3) Die sog. „personalisierte Medizin“ ist ein stark forschungs- und industriegetriebener Bereich der Medizin. Globale Stakeholder bestimmen die Entwicklung, unabhängig finanzierte Forschung gibt es kaum. Daher besteht die Gefahr, dass wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisgewinn durch wirtschaftliche Einzelinteressen behindert wird. Empirische Erfahrungen, z. B. der Preisentwicklung neuer Krebsmedikamente, zeigen, dass das Versprechen der Kostenersparnis jeder Evidenz entbehrt. 4) Die hohen Investitionen in die „personalisierte Medizin“ werfen wichtige ethische Fragen nach Opportunitätskosten und Prioritätensetzungen im öffentlichen Gesundheitswesen auf. Derzeit profitieren wenige Patientengruppen von den hohen Forschungs- und Behandlungskosten der „personalisierten Medizin.“ Gleichzeitig bleiben Forschung und Versorgung in anderen wichtigen medizinischen Bereichen unterfinanziert. Eine öffentliche Debatte über die Prioritäten in medizinischer Forschung und Versorgung sowie darüber, wie diese in demokratischen Gesellschaften und in öffentlichen Gesundheitssystemen umgesetzt werden können, ist erforderlich. Eine an genetischen Biomarkern ausgerichtete sog. „personalisierte Medizin“ führt nicht zu einer persönlicheren Behandlung des einzelnen Patienten und ist von einer personen- oder patientenzentrierten Medizin zu unterscheiden. Von den bisherigen Therapiefortschritten profitieren Untergruppen von Patienten, z. B. in der Onkologie. Für die Mehrheit der Patienten konnten keine Verbesserungen erzielt werden. Für eine Kostenersparnis im Gesundheitswesen fehlt jegliche empirische Evidenz, vielmehr muss nach bisherigen Erfahrungen mit Kostensteigerungen gerechnet werden. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungDas Paradigma einer „personalisierten Medizin“ in der klinischen Forschung und Praxis wirft verschiedene Fragen nach Notwendigkeit, Erwartung, Chancen und Risiken auf. In einer laufenden empirisch-ethischen Studie untersuchen wir klinische Forscher- und Patientenperspektiven hinsichtlich des zukünftigen Einsatzes „personalisierter Medizin“ beim Rektumkarzinom. Ziel der Studie ist es, mittels Interviews mit Ärzten/forschern und Patienten und teilnehmender Beobachtung bei Arzt-Patient-Gesprächen ethisch relevante Aspekte der Erforschung und Behandlung im Kontext „personalisierter Medizin“ zu explorieren. Die Analyse von Unterschieden und Gemeinsamkeiten zwischen den Gruppierungen dient der Detektion (...) von Konfliktfeldern in der klinischen Praxis. Es zeigt sich, dass Patienten und Ärzte unterschiedliche Annahmen von „personalisierter Medizin“ haben. Dies könnte zu Konflikten in der klinischen Praxis führen, die so früh wie möglich geklärt werden sollten. (shrink)

Big data techniques, data-driven science and their technological applications raise many serious ethical questions, notably about privacy protection. In this paper, we highlight an entanglement between epistemology and ethics of big data. Discussing the mobilisation of big data in the fields of biomedical research and health care, we show how an overestimation of big data epistemic power – of their objectivity or rationality understood through the lens of neutrality – can become ethically threatening. Highlighting the irreducible non-neutrality at play in (...) big data tools, we insist upon the ethical importance of a critical epistemological approach in which big data are understood as possibly valuable only when coupled with human intelligence and evaluative rationality. (shrink)

The article provides an overview of important topics in contemporary medical ethics. Methodologically, it is a literature review. The article addresses only a limited selection of the problematic areas, which are, however, related to each other: digitisation of medicine, genome editing, personalised medicine as well as ethical problems and dilemmas of allocation in healthcare. The global COVID-19 pandemic has emerged as a focus and trigger. Reflections on human rights and justice in medicine are fundamental not only (...) on the individual and social level but also on a global scale. The fundamental question is how society as a whole can be involved in the complex biopolitical and bioethical debate. The social and cultural consequences of life increasingly being understood as a technical product rather than a gift are serious.Contribution: The article also reflects on the specific contribution that Christian theology, and in particular the reformed heritage, can make to bioethical debates in modern society. The distinction between instrumental knowledge [Verfügungswissen] and orientational knowledge [Orientierungswissen] is helpful for its better understanding. A crucial result of this article is that medical treatment is repeatedly faced with ethical dilemmas. Moreover, medical progress not only creates new and better solutions to medical problems, it also raises new ethical questions that did not exist before. The purpose of medical ethics lies in identifying such dilemmas and developing ethical decision-making processes that help us to deal with such dilemmas to some extent. (shrink)

The rise of personalised medicine can be seen as an extension of individualism and as a threat to the common good.

The paper discusses some of the implications of regulatory innovation in the area of advanced biological therapies and personalised medicine. Benefits, risks and trade-offs are highlighted.

Even in the increasingly individualized American medical system, advocates of 'personalized medicine' claim that healthcare isn't individualized enough. With the additional glamour of new biotechnologies such as genetic testing and pharmacogenetics behind it, 'Me Medicine'-- personalized or stratified medicine-- appears to its advocates as the inevitable and desirable way of the future. Drawing on an extensive evidence base, this book examines whether these claims are justified. It goes on to examine an alternative tradition rooted in communitarian ideals, (...) that of the common good as a goal in medicine. (shrink)

Personalised nutrition (PN) has emerged over the past twenty years as a promising area of research in the postgenomic era and has been popularized as the new big thing out of molecular biology. Advocates of PN claim that previous approaches to nutrition sought general and universal guidance that applied to all people. In contrast, they contend that PN operates with the principle that “one size does not fit all” when it comes to dietary guidance. While the molecular mechanisms studied (...) within PN are new, the notion of a personal dietary regime guided by medical advice has a much longer history that can be traced back to Galen’s “On Food and Diet” or Ibn Sina’s (westernized as Avicenna) “Canon of Medicine”. Yet this history is either wholly ignored or misleadingly appropriated by PN proponents. This (mis)use of history, we argue helps to sustain the hype of the novelty of the proposed field and potential commodification of molecular advice that undermines longer histories of food management in premodern and non-Western cultures. Moreover, it elides how the longer history of nutritional advice always happened in a heavily moralized, gendered, and racialized context deeply entwined with collective technologies of power, not just individual advice. This article aims at offering a wider appreciation of this longer history to nuance the hype and exceptionalism surrounding contemporary claims. (shrink)

Clinical trials aim to minimise participant risk and generate new clinical knowledge for the wider population. Many military agencies are now investing efforts in pushing towards developing new treatments involving Brain-Computer Interfaces, Gene Therapy and Stem Cells interventions. These trials are targeting smaller disease groups, as such they give rise to novel participant risks of harms that are largely not accommodated by existing practice. This is of most concern with irreversible harms at early trial stages, where participants may forfeit any (...) future therapy, and in personalised medicine, where the individual participant assumes all of the trial risk. Given these new experimental interventions involve high risk of irreversible harms, how much risk should patients be exposed to when participating in experimental testing of innovative technologies? Designing clinical trials which better balance risk/benefit ratios for participants is crucial. The aim of this book chapter is to suggest a new stratified risk framework aimed at minimising the risk-benefit ratio to participants in clinical trials associated with high risk of irrevocable harms. We will argue it demands a higher-level of clinical data capture at earlier trial stages than predicated by current trial doctrine; it also requires publication of all trial data to minimise risk to participants of any future trial. (shrink)

Precision Medicine is driven by the idea that the rapidly increasing range of relatively cheap and efficient self-tracking devices make it feasible to collect multiple kinds of phenotypic data. Advocates of N = 1 research emphasize the countless opportunities personal data provide for optimizing individual health. At the same time, using biomarker data for lifestyle interventions has shown to entail complex challenges. In this paper, we argue that researchers in the field of precision medicine need to address the (...) performative dimension of collecting data. We propose the fun-house mirror as a metaphor for the use of personal health data; each health data source yields a particular type of image that can be regarded as a ‘data mirror’ that is by definition specific and skewed. This requires competence on the part of individuals to adequately interpret the images thus provided. (shrink)

The soaring promises made by personalized genetic medicine advocates are probably loftier than those in any other medical or scientific realm today. Are they justified?

Background: The concept of digital twins has great potential for transforming the existing health care system by making it more personalized. As a convergence of health care, artificial intelligence, and information and communication technologies, personalized health care services that are developed under the concept of digital twins raise a myriad of ethical issues. Although some of the ethical issues are known to researchers working on digital health and personalized medicine, currently, there is no comprehensive review that maps the major (...) ethical risks of digital twins for personalized health care services. Objective: This study aims to fill the research gap by identifying the major ethical risks of digital twins for personalized health care services. We first propose a working definition for digital twins for personalized health care services to facilitate future discussions on the ethical issues related to these emerging digital health services. We then develop a process-oriented ethical map to identify the major ethical risks in each of the different data processing phases. Methods: We resorted to the literature on eHealth, personalized medicine, precision medicine, and information engineering to identify potential issues and developed a process-oriented ethical map to structure the inquiry in a more systematic way. The ethical map allows us to see how each of the major ethical concerns emerges during the process of transforming raw data into valuable information. Developers of a digital twin for personalized health care service may use this map to identify ethical risks during the development stage in a more systematic way and can proactively address them. Results: This paper provides a working definition of digital twins for personalized health care services by identifying 3 features that distinguish the new application from other eHealth services. On the basis of the working definition, this paper further layouts 10 major operational problems and the corresponding ethical risks. Conclusions: It is challenging to address all the major ethical risks that a digital twin for a personalized health care service might encounter proactively without a conceptual map at hand. The process-oriented ethical map we propose here can assist the developers of digital twins for personalized health care services in analyzing ethical risks in a more systematic manner. (shrink)

Francis Collins had an impressive track record as a gene hunter (cystic fibrosis, neurofibromatosis, Huntington’s disease) when he was appointed Director of the Human Genome Project (HGP) in 1993. In June 2000, together with Craig Venter and President Bill Clinton, he presented the draft version of the human genome sequence to a worldwide audience during a famous press conference. And in 2009, President Barack Obama nominated him as director of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the largest Tfunding agency for (...) biomedical research in the world. s The In 2006, Collins published his book The Language of God,3 an autobiographical account of the HGP and its scientific, historical, and societal significance, with special attention paid to the impact of the human sequence on the way we see our world and ourselves.4 Now, by way of a sequel, he has written The Language of Life. Wherea Language of God focused on the genome sequence of mankind in general, and on the HGP as a “revolution” in biomedicine, the new book, as indicated by its subtitle, is oriented towards “the revolution in personalized medicine”, the impact of the genomics revolution on the personal lives of individuals. Before subjecting Collins’ book to a closer reading, I first of all would like to explain how I will read it and from what perspective. Why is genomics in general, and the HGP and its aftermath in particular, a subject of interest to a philosopher like me? Why did I become interested in assessing the HGP and in studying the work and views of some of its key contributors? (shrink)

The growth of personalised medicine threatens the communal approach that has brought our biggest health gains.

Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) and Personalized Medicine (PM) share a common goal: reducing the gap between the results of biomedical research and their clinical application. PM is, however, often presented as a “new paradigm” for medicine, just as EBM was in the 1990s. It covers a wide variety of projects but the core idea that generally unites them is the ambition of better taking account of individual specificities than did EBM with its statistical and population-centred approach. In this (...) article, I concentrate on PM in cancerology, the essence of which is to target treatments based on the molecular profile of the patient. This targeting is made possible by gaining better knowledge about the molecular mechanisms of cancers. The classification of patients as a function of their molecular profile entails the creation of patient sub-groups. This creates a problem for the traditional evaluation of therapeutic treatment promoted by EBM, in particular the use of randomized trials using sizeable cohorts. But a better understanding of the mechanisms and the greater precision of treatments could reduce the need for these trials. Does PM thus represent the revenge of a physio-pathological and mechanistic culture in clinical research against the statistical and empirical one of EBM? My objective is to show how current practices of PM leads to epistemological changes in our estimation of what count as relevant types of information and proof in medicine, in particular in the field of therapeutic evaluation. I defend the idea that PM, far from obviating the need for statistical approaches and the search for correlations, ultimately poses new challenges for EBM. PM drives EBM to strengthen the articulation and the integration of statistical and mechanistic data with a view to providing a better service for each patient. (shrink)

In silico medicine is still forging a road for itself in the current biomedical landscape. Discursively and rhetorically, it is using a three-way positioning, first, deploying discourses of personalised medicine, second, extending the 3Rs from animal to clinical research, and third, aligning its methods with experimental methods. The discursive and rhetorical positioning in promotions and statements of the programme gives us insight into the sociability of the scientific labour of advancing the programme. Its progress depends on complex (...) social, institutional and technological conditions which are not external to its epistemology, but intricately interwoven with it. This article sets out to show that this is the case through an analysis of the process of computational modelling that is at the core of its epistemology. In this paper I show that the very notion of ‘model’ needs to be re-thought for in silico medicine, and propose a replacement, in the form of the ‘Model-Simulation-Experiment-System’ or MSE-system, which is simultaneously an epistemological, social and technological system. I argue that the MSE-system is radically mediated by social relations, technologies and symbolic systems. We need now to understand how such mediations operate effectively in the construction of robust MSE-systems. (shrink)

The development of gene expression profiling and next-generation sequencing technologies have steered oncogenomics to the forefront of precision medicine. This created a need for harmonious cooperation between clinicians and researchers to increase access to precision oncology, despite multiple implementation challenges being encountered. The aim is to apply personalised treatment strategies early in cancer management, targeting tumour subtypes and actionable gene variants within the individual’s broader clinical risk profile and wellbeing. A knowledge-generating database linked to the South African Medical (...) Research Council’s Genomic Centre has been created for the application of personalised medicine, using an integrated service and research approach. Insights gained from patient experiences related to tumour heterogeneity, access to targeted therapies and incidental findings of pathogenic germline variants in tumour DNA, provided practice-changing evidence for the implementation of a cost-minimisation pathology-supported genetic testing strategy. Integrating clinical care with genomic research through data sharing advances personalised medicine and maximises precision oncology benefits. (shrink)

Genomics is increasingly becoming an integral component of health research and clinical care. The perceived difficulties associated with genetic research involving Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people mean that they have largely been excluded as research participants. This limits the applicability of research findings for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients. Emergent use of genomic technologies and personalised medicine therefore risk contributing to an increase in existing health disparities unless urgent action is taken. To allow the potential benefits (...) of genomics to be more equitably distributed, and minimise potential harms, we recommend five actions: ensure diversity of participants by implementing appropriate protocols at the study design stage; target diseases that disproportionately affect disadvantaged groups; prioritise capacity building to promote Indigenous leadership across research professions; develop resources for consenting patients or participants from different cultural and linguistic backgrounds; and integrate awareness of issues relating to Indigenous people into the governance structures, formal reviews, data collection protocols and analytical pipelines of health services and research projects. (shrink)

From 1900 onwards, scientists and novelists have explored the contours of a future society based on the use of “anthropotechnologies” (techniques applicable to human beings for the purpose of performance enhancement ranging from training and education to genome-based biotechnologies). Gradually but steadily, the technologies involved migrated from (science) fiction into scholarly publications, and from “utopia” (or “dystopia”) into science. Building on seminal ideas borrowed from Nietzsche, Peter Sloterdijk has outlined the challenges inherent in this development. Since time immemorial, and at (...) least since the days of Plato’s Academy, human beings have been interested in possibilities for (physical or mental) performance enhancement. We are constantly trying to improve ourselves, both collectively and individually, for better or for worse. At present, however, new genomics-based technologies are opening up new avenues for self-amelioration. Developments in research facilities using animal models may to a certain extent be seen as expeditions into our own future. Are we able to address the bioethical and biopolitical issues awaiting us? After analyzing and assessing Sloterdijk’s views, attention will shift to a concrete domain of application, namely sport genomics. For various reasons, top athletes are likely to play the role of genomics pioneers by using personalized genomics information to adjust diet, life-style, training schedules and doping intake to the strengths and weaknesses of their personalized genome information. Thus, sport genomics may be regarded as a test bed where the contours of genomics-based self-management are tried out. (shrink)

Tauber's book outlines a philosophy of medicine that sees an ethos of caring as the central imperative of a doctor. Three broad claims are defended in the text. First, Tauber is sceptical of conceptions of medicine that treat physicians as primarily scientists or the agents of profit-makers or administrators. For such conceptions fail to consider the patient as a whole or his/her personalised suffering as demanding empathy. Second, he criticises conceptions of medical ethics that emphasise personal autonomy. (...) After a brief account of how, he thinks, the ideal of autonomy was invented and developed in Western thought, Tauber questions the significance of autonomy in medicine. Because of …. (shrink)

The growth in the direct-to-consumer genetic testing industry poses a number of challenges for healthcare practice, among a number of other areas of concern. Several companies providing this service send their customers reports including information variously referred to as genetic ethnicity, genetic heritage, biogeographic ancestry, and genetic ancestry. In this article, we argue that such information should not be used in healthcare consultations or to assess health risks. Far from representing a move toward personalized medicine, use of this information (...) poses risks both to patients as individuals and to racialized ethnic groups because of the way it misrepresents human genetic diversity. (shrink)

Tauber's book outlines a philosophy of medicine that sees an ethos of caring as the central imperative of a doctor. Three broad claims are defended in the text. First, Tauber is sceptical of conceptions of medicine that treat physicians as primarily scientists or the agents of profit-makers or administrators. For such conceptions fail to consider the patient as a whole or his/her personalised suffering as demanding empathy. Second, he criticises conceptions of medical ethics that emphasise personal autonomy. (...) After a brief account of how, he thinks, the ideal of autonomy was invented and developed in Western thought, Tauber questions the significance of autonomy in medicine. Because of …. (shrink)