That being said,

they still estimated the market for the

That being said,

they still estimated the market for the three most AZD1480 concentration prominent genome profiling companies (23andme, deCODE and Navigenics) to be around US $10–20 million in 2009. This implies that these companies certainly know how to attract certain consumers; however, in order to be a sustainable business, they need be able to do more than simply attract a bunch of enthusiastic early adopters of new technologies. The announcement in November 2009 by the biotech company deCODE Genetics, (which markets the DTC genetic service called deCODEme) that it had filed a MK5108 price voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the USA Bankruptcy Code raised the question whether other companies offering DTC genomics services would also follow suit (Hayden 2009). An analysis of DTC genetic testing companies’ activities in this field shows that various BKM120 genetic tests that were marketed are no longer available for purchase from certain companies. For example, the following tests (from certain companies) are no longer available for purchase: tests that predicted AIDS progression based on an analysis of CCR5-Delta 32 and CCR2-64I genes (www.​hivgene.​com, www.​hivmirror.​com); nutrigenomic tests (www.​mycellf.​com, www.​genecare.​co.​za, www.​integrativegenom​ics.​com); risk assessment tests of various common disorders such as cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, immune system defects, Alzheimer Disease

(www.​genovations.​com, www.​smartgenetics.​com, www.​qtrait.​com); tests for addiction (www.​docblum.​com);

pharmacogenomic tests (www.​signaturegenetic​s.​com); carrier testing for disorders such as cystic fibrosis (www.​udlgenetics.​com). Meanwhile, additional companies retracted their product from the market temporarily for unknown reasons (www.​genotrim.​com, www.​psynomics.​com), and it is unclear whether they will be available again. Other initiatives, such as the free “comprehensive genetic test” (www.​geneview.​com), also disappeared. Since these companies have, for the most part, left the clonidine market in silence, it is difficult to understand exactly their reasons for doing so. One may suggest that the consequences of the global financial crisis (initiated in 2007–2008) may have contributed to the downfall of some of these companies (i.e., failure to find enough paying customers). That being said, it seems that various companies also struggled with intellectual property protection (Bandelt et al. 2008; Knowledge 2009) and the legal requirement that a physician should be involved in the ordering of genetic tests (Wadman 2008) (which is the case in some states in the USA such as Connecticut and Michigan; The Genetics and Public Policy Center 2010). Furthermore, companies testing only a few mutations (with each mutation corresponding to one trait) may have had difficulties competing with companies like 23andme, which offer full genome scans (Hayden 2008).

Comments are closed.