Net negative for sequencing at present, then, I take it.
About 5% of exploratory cancer sequencing is estimated to lead to some kind of beneficial information, 2018 estimate. So far so good, but we need to get this number to ~100% ASAP. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamaoncology/article-abstract/2678901 … #Genomicspic.twitter.com/u913RCdbRH
-
-
-
Depends how much money you have. I would do it, but the expected gain is quite small.
-
No risk of false positives? (I suppose could be nil or negligible. I have not thought about it for more than a minute as regards genetic screening.)
-
There's always risk of that. Doesn't mean that has a negative effect on health. Depends on what the effect of treating the wrong mutation is, guess it depends on that the gene does. But I imagine the list of useful drugs will go up quickly, hence useful to have data around.
-
I certainly agree on the eventual utility and urgent need for more precision in the area!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.