Abstract
"Personalized medicine" has become a generic term referring to techniques that evaluate either the host or the disease to enhance the likelihood of beneficial patient outcomes from treatment interventions. There is, however, much more to personalization of care than just identifying the biotherapeutic strategy with the highest likelihood of benefit. In its new meaning, "personalized medicine" could overshadow the individually tailored, whole-person care that is at the bedrock of what people need and want when they are ill. Since names and definitional terms set the scope of the discourse, they have the power to define what personalized medicine includes or does not include, thus influencing the scope of the professional purview regarding the delivery of personalized care. Taxonomic accuracy is important in understanding the differences between therapeutic interventions that are distinguishable in their aims, indications, scope, benefits, and risks. In order to restore the due emphasis to the patient and his or her needs, we assert that it is necessary, albeit belated, to deconflate the contemporary term "personalized medicine" by taxonomizing this therapeutic strategy more accurately as "biologically personalized therapeutics" (BPT). The scope of truly personalized medicine and its relationship to biologically personalized therapeutics is described, emphasizing that the best of care must give due recognition and emphasis to both BPT and truly personalized medicine.