{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01632302405498282, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.581920903954802, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[The invention of personalized medicine, between technological upheavals and utopia].

The idea of personalized medicine raises a series of questions. If one considers that the physician takes into account the uniqueness of his patient in the frame of the medical consultation, is the definition of medicine as "personalized" not a pleonasm? If not, why has this ambiguous denomination been adopted? In addition, is this form of medicine a novel discipline capable of revolutionizing therapeutic approaches as claimed in its accompanying discourses or is it in continuity with the molecular conception of biomedicine? Rather than attempting to directly answer these questions, we focused our attention on the organizing concepts, the technological breakthroughs and the transformations in medical practices that characterize this medicine. Following this brief analysis, it appears that the choice of a term as equivocal as personalized medicine and the emphasis on the antagonistic notions of revolution and continuity in medicine are the signs of reshuffling that is emerging between actors in the health care system, in academia and in pharmaceutical companies.