Basnayake Ralalage Prabhathi, Mitchell Tala, Zammit Claire, Baynam Gareth, Kowal Emma, Masey Libby, McGaughran Julie, Boughtwood Tiffany, Jenkins Misty, Pratt Gregory, Ferdinand Angeline
Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, University of Melbourne, Carlton, VIC, Australia.
Department of Community Services, Torrens University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Front Public Health. 2024 Dec 20;12:1464701. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2024.1464701. eCollection 2024.
The field of genomics is rapidly evolving and has made significant impact on the diagnosis and understanding of rare and genetic diseases, in guiding precision medicine in cancer treatment, and in providing personalized risk assessment for disease development and treatment responses. However, according to the literature, there is widespread socio economic and racial inequities in the diagnosis, treatment, and in the use of genomic medicine services. This policy review sets out to explore the concept of equity in access to genomic care, the level of inclusion of equity and how it is addressed and what mechanisms are in place to achieve equity in genomic care in the international health policy.
A systematic search for genomic policies was conducted using 3 databases. In addition, General and Specific Policy Repositories, Global Consortia in Genomic Medicine, WHO Collaborating Centers in Genomics, Australian Genomics, Public Policy Projects, Global Genomic Medicine Consortium (G2MC), G2MC conference Oct 2023 and National Human Genome Research Institute databases were searched using the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Seventeen policies were selected and analyzed using the EquiFrame.
The Core Concept of access is highly cited in most of the selected policies. The CCs that are covered to a lesser degree are participation, quality, coordination of services, cultural responsiveness and non-discrimination. The CCs of liberty and entitlement are not addressed in any of the selected policies. The coverage of vulnerable communities in the policies varies from country to country.
Genomic health science is rapidly evolving and presents a major challenge for policies to remain current and effectively address new discoveries in the field. There is a relative dearth of policies that focus on clinical genetic services which may reflect a gap in policy and policy research translation and implementation. Recommendations for countries, irrespective of their economic and social contexts, include conducting regular policy reviews to accommodate the advances in genomics field and inclusion of specific mechanisms to achieve equity in genomic health. Insights and experiences in achieving healthcare equity in HICs and LMICs can offer valuable lessons for each other.
基因组学领域正在迅速发展,对罕见病和遗传病的诊断与理解、癌症治疗中的精准医学指导以及疾病发展和治疗反应的个性化风险评估产生了重大影响。然而,根据文献记载,在基因组医学服务的诊断、治疗及使用方面,存在广泛的社会经济和种族不平等现象。本政策综述旨在探讨获得基因组医疗服务的公平性概念、公平性的纳入程度及其解决方式,以及国际卫生政策中实现基因组医疗公平性的机制。
使用3个数据库对基因组政策进行系统检索。此外,还根据纳入和排除标准,检索了一般和特定政策存储库、基因组医学全球联盟、世界卫生组织基因组学合作中心、澳大利亚基因组学、公共政策项目、全球基因组医学联盟(G2MC)、2023年10月G2MC会议以及国家人类基因组研究所数据库。选择了17项政策并使用EquiFrame进行分析。
在大多数选定政策中,获得服务的核心概念被高度引用。覆盖程度较低的核心概念包括参与、质量、服务协调、文化响应能力和非歧视。选定政策中均未涉及自由和权利的核心概念。政策中对弱势群体的覆盖程度因国家而异。
基因组健康科学发展迅速,这给政策跟上时代步伐并有效应对该领域的新发现带来了重大挑战。关注临床遗传服务的政策相对较少,这可能反映出政策与政策研究的转化及实施存在差距。无论经济和社会背景如何,对各国的建议包括定期进行政策审查,以适应基因组学领域的进展,并纳入实现基因组健康公平性的具体机制。高收入国家和低收入及中等收入国家在实现医疗公平方面的见解和经验可以相互借鉴。