Potential of big data analytics in the French in vitro diagnostics market.

The new paradigm of the big data raises many expectations, particularly in the field of health. Curiously, even though medical biology laboratories generate a great amount of data, the opportunities offered by this new field are poorly documented. For better understanding the clinical context of chronical disease follow-up, for leveraging preventive and/or personalized medicine, the contribution of big data analytics seems very promising. It is within this framework that we have explored to use data of a Breton group of laboratories of medical biology to analyze the possible contributions of their exploitation in the improvement of the clinical practices and to anticipate the evolution of pathologies for the benefit of patients. We report here three practical applications derived from routine laboratory data from a period of 5 years (February 2010-August 2015): follow-up of patients treated with AVK according to the recommendations of the High authority of health (HAS), use of the new troponin markers HS and NT-proBNP in cardiology. While the risks and difficulties of using algorithms in the health domain should not be underestimated - quality, accessibility, and protection of personal data in particular - these first results show that use of tools and technologies of the big data repository could provide decisive support for the concept of "evidence based medicine".

Does customer information fulfill MEDDEV criteria in cases of product problems of in vitro diagnostics for infection testing?

The European Directive 98/79/EC on in vitro diagnostics (IVD) regulates marketing and post market surveillance of IVD in the European Economic Area. In cases of incidents and field safety corrective actions (FSCA) manufacturers have to inform responsible competent authority (CA) and public by field safety notices (FSN). We analyzed FSCA and FSN of IVD for infection testing (culture media, reagents, kits, control materials, as well as culture-based analyzers and their general consumables) published by the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM) in Bonn, Germany in 2005-2012 in regard to the European Regulatory Framework of Medical Devices (MEDDEV). One hundred and sixty-nine FSCA were published and German and English FSN were found in 157 and 154 cases, respectively. FSN were clearly characterized as FSN in 110 German and 134 English cases and product names were provided in 157 and 154 cases, respectively. Lot numbers and other information for product characterization were available in 146 and 137 cases, respectively. The information regarding FSCA and product malfunction was provided in 157 and 151 and 144 and 136 cases and that regarding the product related risks with continued use of affected IVD in 116 and 116 cases, respectively. In 156 German and 152 English cases, manufacturers provided the information for risk mitigation, including retesting in 69 and 75 cases, respectively. Requests to pass FSN to persons needing awareness were found in 108 and 87 cases, and contact data were provided in 127 and 131 cases, respectively. We conclude that most FSN fulfilled the MEDDEV criteria. However, type and content of FSN should be improved to ensure a better mitigation of risks due to product failure.

Diagnostic self-testing: autonomous choices and relational responsibilities.

Diagnostic self-testing devices are being developed for many illnesses, chronic diseases and infections. These will be used in hospitals, at point-of-care facilities and at home. Designed to allow earlier detection of diseases, self-testing diagnostic devices may improve disease prevention, slow the progression of disease and facilitate better treatment outcomes. These devices have the potential to benefit both the individual and society by enabling individuals to take a more proactive role in the maintenance of their health and by helping society improve health and reduce health costs. However, the full implications of future home-based diagnostic technology for individuals and society remain unclear due to their novelty. We argue that the development of diagnostic tools, especially for home use, will heighten a number of ethical challenges. This paper will explore some of the ethical implications of home-based self-testing diagnostic devices for the autonomous and relational dimensions of the person. This will be facilitated by examining the impact of diagnostic devices for individual autonomy, for the delivery of accurate diagnosis and for the personal significance of the information for the user. The latter will be examined using Charles Taylor's view of personhood and his emphasis on human agency and interpretation. While the ethical issues are not necessarily new, the development of home-based self-testing diagnostic devices will make issues regarding autonomy, accuracy of information and personal significance more and more demanding. This will be the case particularly when an individual's autonomous choices come into conflict with the person's relational responsibilities.

Awareness and use of direct-to-consumer nutrigenomic tests, United States, 2006.

PURPOSE: Direct-to-consumer genetic tests are increasingly available and may improve confidentiality, convenience, and accessibility. Amid ethical concerns and an uncertain regulatory landscape, the future of this mode of delivery is unclear. One class of products, nutrigenomic tests, is used to analyze DNA and lifestyle habits to assess health risks. Little information is available regarding awareness or use of such tests among consumers or physicians. METHODS: We assessed consumers' awareness and use of nutrigenomic tests in the 2006 HealthStyles national survey (5250 respondents) and awareness among physicians in the 2006 DocStyles national survey (1250 respondents). RESULTS: In the HealthStyles survey, 14% of respondents were aware of nutrigenomic tests, and 0.6% overall had used these tests. Respondents who were aware of nutrigenomic tests tended to be young and educated with a high income. Many physicians (44%) were aware of nutrigenomic tests, although 41% of these physicians had never had a patient ask about such tests, and most (74%) had never discussed the results of a nutrigenomic test with a patient. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide insight into current trends in public demand and interest in nutrigenomic tests and will aid in assessing the impact of policies, efforts at public or provider education, and the evolution of the availability and demand for such tests.