Frank Harrell, chair of our Biostats department, will be giving a seminar entitled "Towards a More Rigorous Approach to Personalized Medicine." As a champion of methods and strategies for reproducible research, Dr. Harrell's lecture on personalized medicine should be interesting.
Frank E Harrell Jr, Professor and Chair, Department of Biostatistics 
Wednesday, 29 Sep 10, 1:30-2:30pm, MRBIII Conference Room 1220
Intended Audience: Persons interested in personalized medicine, biomarkers, reproducible research, clinical epidemiology
Description: 
There are many ways to personalize the diagnosis and treatment of  diseases, pharmacogenomics being one of them.  Personalization can be  based on routinely collected information, molecular signatures, or on  repeated trials on the patient whose treatment plan is being devised.   However, current emphases in personalized medicine research often ignore  characteristics known to impact treatment benefit, in favor of tests  that either generate more revenue or are developed with research that is  perhaps easier to fund than "low-tech" research.  Failure of the  research community to fully utilize rich datasets generated by  randomized clinical trials only hightens this concern.
Research supporting personalized medicine can be made more rigorous and  relevant.  For example in acute diseases, multi-period crossover studies  can be used to measure individual response to therapy, and these  studies can provide an upper bound on the genome by treatment  interaction.  When patient by treatment interaction is demonstrated,  crossover studies can form an ideal basis for pharmacogenomics.   However, even with the best within-patient data, group average treatment  effects need to be incorporated in order for predictions for individual  patients to have high precision.
There are a few ways to do personalized medicine well but a multitude of  ways to do it poorly.  Biomarker research in particular has not  fulfilled its early promises, a major reason being flawed methodology.   The flaws include faulty experimental design, bias, overfitting, weak  validation, irreproducible research, data processing and analysis  practices, and failure to rigorously show that the new markers add  information to readily available clinical data.  This will be discussed  in terms of Platt's concept of "strong inference", seeking alternative  explanations of findings, and sensitivity analysis.
This talk is also a call for the biostatistics and clinical epidemiology  communities to be more integrally involved in research related to  personalized medicine.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.