Translation research is an essential but not sufficient ingredient for translation of genomic medicine into population health benefits

To the Editor:

I appreciate and agree with the comments of Zimmern and Brice¹ on the recent article describing the Genomic Applications in Practice and Prevention Network.² Translation of genomic advances into population health benefits is a shared goal for the medical and public health communities. The premise of GAPPNet is that translation research, such as comparative effectiveness research,³ will make translation more evidence based. Translation research is a necessary but not sufficient ingredient for translation. From other fields of medicine, we know that many evidence-based applications seem to be “lost in translation” and do not make the desired impact on population health.⁴ GAPPNet will address translation in the context of translation research and the need for explicit processes of guidelines, policy, and service development. One of the four components of GAPPNet are nonresearch translation programs such as the ones that Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently funded.⁵ I agree that “achieving translation of genomic medicine requires the movement of knowledge from the academic and research arena into a world of policy makers, clinical practitioners and health service managers, a community with different objectives, reward strategies and culture.” As a stakeholder-driven enterprise, GAPPNet will attempt to do the kind of knowledge brokering that the authors allude to^6–8 by bringing the stakeholders together to consider their priorities, concerns, and constraints, in the context of social, ethical, legal, and financial implications of innovations. I look forward to an active GAPPNet stakeholder process that should be enhanced by translation research and evaluation, leading to appropriate use of genomic knowledge for the benefit of population health.