Using pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics in the treatment of psychiatric disorders: some ethical and economic considerations"

Current pharmacotherapies for psychiatric disorders are generally incompletely effective. Many patients do not respond well or suffer adverse reactions to these drugs, which can result in poor patient compliance and poor treatment outcome. Adverse drug reactions and non-response are likely to be influenced by genetic polymorphisms. Pharmacogenetics holds some promise for improving the treatment of mood disorders by utilising information about genetic polymorphisms to match patients to the drug therapy that is the most effective with the fewest side effects. Pharmacogenomics promises to facilitate the development of new drugs for treatment. However, these technologies raise many ethical, economic and regulatory issues that need to be addressed before they can be integrated into psychiatry, and medicine more generally. We discuss ethical and policy issues arising from pharmacogenetic testing and pharmacogenomics research, such as informed consent, privacy and confidentiality, research on vulnerable persons and discrimination; and economic viability of pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics. We conclude with recommendations for the regulation and distribution of pharmacogenetic testing services and pharmacogenomic drugs.

Does pharmacogenomics provide an ethical challenge to the utilisation of cost-effectiveness analysis by public health systems?

Pharmacogenomics promotes an understanding of the genetic basis for differences in efficacy or toxicity of drugs in different individuals. Implementation of the outcomes of pharmacogenomic research into clinical practice presents a number of difficulties for healthcare. This paper aims to highlight one of the Unique ethical challenges which pharmacogenomics presents for the utilisation of cost-effectiveness analysis by public health systems. This paper contends that pharmacogenomics provides a challenge to fundamental principles which underlie most systems for deciding which drugs should be publicly subsidised. Pharmacogenomics brings into focus the conflict between equality and utility in the context of using cost-effectiveness analysis to aid distribution of a limited national drug budget.

Predictive genetic test decisions for Huntington's disease: context, appraisal and new moral imperatives

Predictive testing is one of the new genetic technologies which, in conjunction with developing fields such as pharmacogenomics, promises many benefits for preventive and population health. Understanding how individuals appraise and make genetic test decisions is increasingly relevant as the technology expands. Lay understandings of genetic risk and test decision-making, located within holistic life frameworks including family or kin relationships, may vary considerably from clinical representations of these phenomena. The predictive test for Huntington's disease (HD), whilst specific to a single-gene, serious, mature-onset but currently untreatable disorder, is regarded as a model in this context. This paper reports upon a qualitative Australian study which investigated predictive test decision-making by individuals at risk for HD, the contexts of their decisions and the appraisals which underpinned them. In-depth interviews were conducted in Australia with 16 individuals at 50% risk for HD, with variation across testing decisions, gender, age and selected characteristics. Findings suggested predictive testing was regarded as a significant life decision with important implications for self and others, while the right not to know genetic status was staunchly and unanimously defended. Multiple contexts of reference were identified within which test decisions were located, including intra- and inter-personal frameworks, family history and experience of HID, and temporality. Participants used two main criteria in appraising test options: perceived value of, or need for the test information, for self and/or significant others, and degree to which such information could be tolerated and managed, short and long-term, by self and/or others. Selected moral and ethical considerations involved in decision-making are examined, as well as the clinical and socio-political contexts in which predictive testing is located. The paper argues that psychosocial vulnerabilities generated by the availability of testing technologies and exacerbated by policy imperatives towards individual responsibility and self-governance should be addressed at broader societal levels. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.