For clinicians seeking to provide a unique way to treat or diagnose a patient, a recent study found that the issues go beyond awareness or patients feeling comfortable—there remains the question of something as simple as: what should we call it?
Clinicians remain uncertain whether to name the new field “precision” or “personalized” medicine according to the new CHEST Clinical Perspectives™ White Paper: “Precision Medicine: Adoption of Emerging Methods of Evaluation and Therapy.” A survey of some of the leading practicing community clinicians found that only 35% called tailoring medical treatment to the individual characteristics of each patient “precision” medicine with 24% preferring “personalized” medicine. Thirty-six percent of respondents used the terms interchangeably.
“With the speed of new technologies being introduced into the already busy lives of clinicians, we are noticing significant barriers to adaptation,” said Nichole T. Tanner, MD, MSCR, FCCP. “We found that while clinicians are intrigued by the advances and potential utility of precision testing, including biomarkers, they are implementing technologies at variable rates as they try to better understand the options.”
Beyond the communication issues, the study found that most clinicians surveyed did not know enough about precision medicine to adopt it into their practice. Those surveyed reported that they wanted to see more published studies on the effectiveness of the newly available tools before discussing these options with their patients.
The results of this study were arrived upon from a survey sent to randomly selected pulmonologists from the CHEST database. The majority of the respondents were general pulmonologists with intensivists and interventional pulmonologists also responding.
Dr. Tanner served as the lead advisor for this issue of Clinical Perspectives. She will be hosting a webinar to review the conclusions of this paper at 10 am CT on July 30.
About the lead advisor for this edition:
Nichole T. Tanner, MD, MSCR, FCCP
Medical University of South Carolina
Nichole T. Tanner, MD, MSCR, FCCP, is a lung cancer pulmonologist at the Ralph H. Johnson VA Hospital with a joint appointment as Associate Professor of Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina (MUSC). Her research and clinical interests focus on lung cancer screening, disparities, pulmonary nodule evaluation, and the staging and diagnosis of lung cancer. She is also the Co-Director of the NCI-designated Hollings Cancer Center Lung Cancer Screening program at MUSC.
CHEST is the global leader in advancing best patient outcomes through innovative chest medicine education, clinical research, and team-based care. This includes connecting health-care professionals to cutting-edge original research and a wide array of evidence-based guidelines through the journal CHEST®, while also serving as a resource for clinicians through year-round meetings, live courses, books, white papers, and mobile apps, delivering content in the areas of pulmonary, critical care, and sleep medicine.
CHEST Clinical Perspectives covers compelling issues in chest medicine on topics ranging from the use of biologics in treatment of patients with severe asthma, to the state of practice in tissue sampling and testing for NSCLC. An expert panel of thought leaders from the Mayo Clinic, Baylor College of Medicine, Medical University of South Carolina, Walter Reed Army Medical Center, and Emory University help to guide the content of each study and lend rich expertise and perspectives in interpreting the results.
More information about CHEST Clinical Perspectives, part of the CHEST Analytics program, can be found at insights.chestnet.org. To suggest a topic to be covered in a future issue, contact Linda Tomczynski, firstname.lastname@example.org or +1 (224) 521-9593.