Comments on: Pharmacogenomics: "Physicians are the sitting ducks in this new class of litigation" http://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/01/pharmacogenomics-physicians-are.html Tue, 14 Feb 2012 19:56:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: Leo Wang MDhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/01/pharmacogenomics-physicians-are.html#comment-70167 Leo Wang MD Sat, 06 Jan 2007 17:05:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/01/pharmacogenomics-physicians-are-the-sitting-ducks-in-this-new-class-of-litigation.html#comment-70167 I suspect "necessary" will be dependent on what the plaintiff is trying to sue foe. I suspect “necessary” will be dependent on what the plaintiff is trying to sue foe.

]]> By: David Moskowitz MD FACPhttp://www.kevinmd.com/blog/2007/01/pharmacogenomics-physicians-are.html#comment-70139 David Moskowitz MD FACP Fri, 05 Jan 2007 21:17:00 +0000 http://clients.emmense.com/kevinmd/2007/01/pharmacogenomics-physicians-are-the-sitting-ducks-in-this-new-class-of-litigation.html#comment-70139 I don't know of any pharmacogenomic tests worth doing yet. It's far cheaper and easier to monitor liver-function tests (SGOT/SGPT/alk phos) 1-2 months after starting a statin, say, then spending $500-$1,000 for a CYP450 panel. <br/><br/>Could someone mention a "necessary" pharmacogenomic test so we could debate how necessary it really is? I don’t know of any pharmacogenomic tests worth doing yet. It’s far cheaper and easier to monitor liver-function tests (SGOT/SGPT/alk phos) 1-2 months after starting a statin, say, then spending $500-$1,000 for a CYP450 panel.

Could someone mention a “necessary” pharmacogenomic test so we could debate how necessary it really is?

]]>