Marketing of Personalized Cancer Care on the Web: An Analysis of Internet Websites

作者: Stacy W. Gray , Angel Cronin , Elizabeth Bair , Neal Lindeman , Vish Viswanath

DOI: 10.1093/JNCI/DJV030

关键词:

摘要: Internet marketing may accelerate the use of care based on genomic or tumor-derived data. However, online be detrimental if it endorses products unproven benefit. We conducted an analysis websites to identify personalized cancer medicine (PCM) and claims. A Delphi Panel categorized PCM as standard nonstandard evidence clinical utility. Fifty-five websites, sponsored by commercial entities, academic institutions, physicians, research institutes, organizations, that marketed included somatic (58%) germline (20%) analysis, interpretive services (15%), physicians/institutions offering (44%). Of 32 sites 56% specific test information (range 1–152 tests). All statistical tests were two-sided, comparisons website content using McNemar’s test. More contained about benefits than limitations (85% vs 27%, P < .001). Websites specifying statistically significantly more likely market one compared with (88% 44%, = .04).

参考文章(29)
Judy Mouchawar, Suzanne Laurion, Alanna Kulchak-Rahm, Debra P. Ritzwoller, Sharon Hensley-Alford, Jennifer Ellis, Assessing controversial direct-to-consumer advertising for hereditary breast cancer testing: reactions from women and their physicians in a managed care organization. The American Journal of Managed Care. ,vol. 11, pp. 601- 608 ,(2005)
William Patrick, The Food and Drug Administration Chelsea House. ,(1988)
G. A. ABEL, E. J. NEUFELD, M. SOREL, J. C. WEEKS, Direct‐to‐consumer advertising for bleeding disorders: a content analysis and expert evaluation of advertising claims Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis. ,vol. 6, pp. 1680- 1684 ,(2008) , 10.1111/J.1538-7836.2008.03083.X
George J. Annas, Sherman Elias, 23andMe and the FDA New England Journal of Medicine. ,vol. 370, pp. 985- 988 ,(2014) , 10.1056/NEJMP1316367
Kimberly M. Lovett, Bryan A. Liang, Risks of online advertisement of direct-to-consumer thermography for breast cancer screening. Nature Reviews Cancer. ,vol. 11, pp. 827- 828 ,(2011) , 10.1038/NRC3170
M Aspinall, S M Au, P Billings, R Dreyfuss, J P Evans, A Ferreira-Gonzalez, K T FitzGerald, C Fomous, J Licinio, B Burns McGrath, P S Miller, J Telfair, S Teutsch, M S Williams, P Wise, US system of oversight for genetic testing: a report from the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Genetics, Health and Society. Personalized Medicine. ,vol. 5, pp. 521- 528 ,(2008) , 10.2217/17410541.5.5.521
Christina R Lachance, Lori A H Erby, Beth M Ford, Vincent C Allen, Kimberly A Kaphingst, Informational content, literacy demands, and usability of websites offering health-related genetic tests directly to consumers Genetics in Medicine. ,vol. 12, pp. 304- 312 ,(2010) , 10.1097/GIM.0B013E3181DBD8B2
Edna F. Einsiedel, Rose Geransar, Framing genetic risk: trust and credibility markers in online direct-to-consumer advertising for genetic testing New Genetics and Society. ,vol. 28, pp. 339- 362 ,(2009) , 10.1080/14636770903314509
Robert C Green, Nita A Farahany, Regulation: The FDA is overcautious on consumer genomics Nature. ,vol. 505, pp. 286- 287 ,(2014) , 10.1038/505286A