Pharmacogenetic Results Research Articles

Implementation and Evaluation Strategies for Pharmacogenetic Testing in Hospital Settings: A Scoping Review.

Pharmacogenetic testing in clinical settings has improved the safety and efficacy of drug treatment. There is a growing number of studies evaluating pharmacogenetic implementation and identifying barriers and facilitators. However, no review has focused on bridging the gap between identifying barriers and facilitators of testing and the clinical strategies adopted in response. This review was conducted to understand the implementation and evaluation strategies of pharmacogenetic testing programs. A PRISMA-compliant scoping review was conducted. The included studies discussed pharmacogenetic testing programs implemented in a hospital setting. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed design methods were included. A total of 232 of the 7043 articles that described clinical pharmacogenetic programs were included. The most common specialties that described pharmacogenetic implementation were psychiatry (26%) and oncology (16%), although many studies described institutional programs implemented across multiple specialties (19%). Different specialties reported different clinical outcomes, but all reported similar program performance indicators, such as test uptake and the number of times the test recommendations were followed. There were benefits and drawbacks to delivering test results through research personnel, pharmacists, and electronic alerts, but active engagement of physicians was necessary for the incorporation of pharmacogenetic results into clinical decision making. Further research is required on the maintenance and sustainability of pharmacogenetic testing initiatives. These findings provide an overview of the implementation and evaluation strategies of different specialties that can be used to improve pharmacogenetic testing.

Implementation of a pharmacist-guided pharmacogenomics dosing service at a rural NCI-designated comprehensive cancer center.

The goal of pharmacogenetic testing is to identify genetic variants with significant implications on drug safety and efficacy. Several professional organizations and institutions have demonstrated the value of pharmacist involvement in the implementation of pharmacogenomic services. Therefore, we aimed to establish a pharmacist-guided model for interpretation of pharmacogenetic results for all oncology patients seen at the Dartmouth Cancer Center (DCC) in Lebanon, NH. A pilot of a pharmacist-guided pharmacogenomics dosing service was implemented at the DCC. Pharmacy services included review of results from a next generation sequencing panel for DPYD, TPMT, NUDT15, and UGT1A1 variants. The pharmacist wrote a note in the electronic health record (EHR) detailing actionable drug-gene interactions and drug-dosing guidance, which was then routed to the treating oncologist. Outcomes collected included highlighting actionable mutations and defining pharmacist interventions. In addition, time spent formulating and documenting patient-specific drug-dosing recommendations was collected. From February 2024 through May 2024, a total of 71 patients with pharmacogenetic results, provided by the clinical molecular laboratory at Dartmouth Health, were reviewed by the pharmacist. The majority of patients tested were diagnosed with a malignancy of gastrointestinal origin. Twenty-one patients were found to have actionable variants in at least one of the four genes evaluated, and five of the 21 identified patients had active treatment plans for which dose changes were then implemented. Implementation of a pharmacist-guided pharmacogenomics based dosing service aided in optimizing drug therapy and has positioned Dartmouth Health for further expansion of pharmacogenomics and personalized patient care.

Caffeine, Lorazepam, and Morphine Use in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Population and Potential Relevance of Pharmacogenomics

Abstract Medications are critical for managing acutely ill infants in neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Tailoring therapies to individual differences in response and dose requirements might help improve outcomes. However, tools for optimizing pharmacotherapy remain limited. In this retrospective study, we explored the potential utility of pharmacogenetics for commonly prescribed NICU medications. All patients admitted to our local NICU March-December, 2022 were eligible for inclusion in the study. In infants who received at least three doses of one or more medications, we extracted DNA from residual EDTA blood collected for routine clinical care according to IRB-approved study protocols. Demographic, pharmacy, and clinical information was recorded retrospectively. Targeted pharmacogenetics testing was performed with a custom TaqMan OpenArray and a QuantStudio 12K Flex (ThermoFisher Scientific) with DNA normalized to 50 ng/mL. Results were analyzed using Genotyper Software version 1.3 and allele calls were made based on the combination of variants detected and consensus nomenclature. For drugs administered to at least 30 NICU patients, pharmacogenes were evaluated for variant allele frequency and potential clinical relevance. Of the 132 patients enrolled, 81 were male. Average length of stay was 47 days. Of the 64 different medications prescribed to at least one infant, for 15 of them are described clinical annotations with specific pharmacogenes by the PharmGKB and/or Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium. Of those 15 medications, three were administered at least three times to at least 30 infants: caffeine (n=102), morphine (n=56), and lorazepam (n=31). The associated pharmacogenes were CYP1A2 (caffeine); CYP3A4, OPRM1, COMT, ABCB1 (morphine); and UGT2B15 (lorazepam). Relevant to the rate of clearance of caffeine, rs2069514 (CYP1A2) was heterozygous in 18% of patients, and homozygous in 5%. Relevant to the rate of clearance of morphine, CYP3A4*22 was heterozygous in 5%. The common variants associated with response to morphine, c.472G>A (COMT) and c.118A>G (OPRM1) were heterozygous in 43% and 26%, and were homozygous in 22% and 8%, respectively. The transporter variant ABCB1*2 was heterozygous in 6% and homozygous in 11%. Relevant to the rate of clearance of lorazepam, UGT2B15*2 (rs1902023) was heterozygous in 45%, and homozygous in 31%. Correlation of pharmacogenetic results to specific clinical phenotypes is currently in progress. Pharmacogenetic variants relevant to commonly prescribed medications in the NICU are prevalent. Further clinical correlation of pharmacogenetic results may help inform selection and dosing of medications for critically ill NICU infants. This research may also facilitate detection and definition of new drug-gene associations unique to this patient population.

Should secondary pharmacogenomic variants be actively screened and reported when diagnostic genome-wide sequencing is performed in a child?

This white paper was prepared by the Global Alliance for Genomics and Health Regulatory and Ethics Work Stream’s Pediatric Task Team to review and provide perspective with respect to ethical, legal, and social issues regarding the return of secondary pharmacogenomic variants in children who have a serious disease or developmental disorder and are undergoing exome or genome sequencing to identify a genetic cause of their condition. We discuss actively searching for and reporting pharmacogenetic/genomic variants in pediatric patients, different methods of returning secondary pharmacogenomic findings to the patient/parents and/or treating clinicians, maintaining these data in the patient's health record over time, decision supports to assist using pharmacogenetic results in future treatment decisions, and sharing information in public databases to improve the clinical interpretation of pharmacogenetic variants identified in other children. We conclude by presenting a series of points to consider for clinicians and policymakers regarding whether, and under what circumstances, routine screening and return of pharmacogenomic variants unrelated to the indications for testing is appropriate in children who are undergoing genome-wide sequencing to assist in the diagnosis of a suspected genetic disease.

The Correlation of Two Different Real-Time PCR Devices for the Analysis of CYP2C19 Pharmacogenetic Results

CYP2C19 is a highly polymorphic gene responsible for the metabolism of commonly used drugs. CYP2C19*1, the wild-type allele, is associated with normal enzyme activity, whereas CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*17 lead to null and increased enzyme activity, respectively. The use of different instruments to perform the same pharmacogenetic tests should not affect the reliability of the results reported to clinicians, as required by the ISO 15189 standard. Genotyping assays allowed for the identification of gene variants corresponding to the CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*17 haplotypes in 44 selected samples. Each sample was analyzed in duplicate using the Thermo Fisher Taqman Drug Metabolism probes CYP2C19*2: c_25986767_70 (rs4244285) and CYP2C19*17: c_469857_10 (rs12248560). The experiments were performed on two widely used types of real-time PCR analyzers: ABI PRSIM™7500 and QuantStudioTM12KFlex (both from Applied Biosystems, Thermofisher). The data were analyzed in a Thermo Fisher Cloud facility. The analysis was performed independently by two qualified professionals. Both different instruments and analysts’ interpretations were consistent in identifying the native homozygous, heterozygous, and mutant homozygous variants for CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*17. The results provided by both the primary and backup analyzers showed a perfect correlation. This would allow for the use of the backup analyzer in case the main one is not available.

Pharmacogenetics to prevent hypersensitivity reactions to antiepileptic drugs: is testing performed when indicated?

Extensive scientific evidence consistently demonstrates the clinical validity and utility of HLA-B*15:02 pre-screening in averting severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs), namely Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis, associated with carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine usage. Current practice guidelines and drug labeling actively advocate for pharmacogenetic pre-screening before initiating these antiepileptic drugs (AED), with particular emphasis on patients of Asian descent. However, there is a potential need to strengthen compliance with these recommendations. This retrospective study aimed to describe the pharmacogenetic pre-screening, documentation, and SCARs incidence for patients of Asian ancestry initiated on carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine at a large Northeastern USA healthcare system. Between 1 July 2016 and August 1, 2021, 27 patients with documented Asian heritage in the electronic health record (EHR) were included. The overall rate of HLA-B*15:02 pre-screening before carbamazepine or oxcarbazepine initiation was 4%. None who underwent pharmacogenetic pre-screening carried the associated HLA-B risk allele, and no SCARs were reported. Notably, pharmacogenetic results were not discretely entered into the EHR, and the results were only found as attached documents in the miscellaneous section of the EHR. There remains a significant opportunity for improving HLA-B*15:02 pre-screening for patients starting carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine to prevent SCARs in the USA.

Lessons from clinical implementation of a preemptive pharmacogenetic panel as part of a testing pilot program with an employer-sponsored medical plan.

Introduction: This manuscript reports on a pilot program focused on implementing pharmacogenetic testing within the framework of an employer-sponsored medical plan at University of Florida (UF) Health. The aim was to understand the challenges associated with program implementation and to gather insights into patient attitudes towards PGx testing. Methods: The pilot program adopted a partially preemptive approach, targeting patients on current prescriptions for medications with relevant gene-drug associations. Patients were contacted via phone or through the MyChart system and offered pharmacogenetic testing with no additional direct costs. Results: Of 244 eligible patients, 110 agreed to participate. However, only 61 returned the mailed DNA collection kits. Among these, 89% had at least one potentially actionable genotype-based phenotype. Post-test follow-up revealed that while the majority viewed the process positively, 71% preferred a consultation with a pharmacogenetic specialist for better understanding of their results. Barriers to implementation ranged from fatigue with the healthcare system to a lack of understanding of the pharmacogenetic testing and concerns about privacy and potential misuse of genetic data. Conclusion: The findings underscore the need for clearer patient education on pharmacogenetic results and suggest the importance of the role of pharmacogenetic-trained pharmacists in delivering this education. They also highlight issues with relying on incomplete or inaccurate medication lists in patients' electronic health record. The implementation revealed less obvious challenges, the understanding of which could be beneficial for the success of future preemptive pharmacogenetic implementation programs. The insights from the pilot program served to bridge the information gap between patients, providers, and pharmacogenetic -specialists, with the ultimate goal of improving patient care.

A scoping review of smoking cessation pharmacogenetic studies to advance future research across racial, ethnic, and ancestral populations.

Abstinence rates among smokers attempting to quit remain low despite the wide availability and accessibility of pharmacological smoking cessation treatments. In addition, the prevalence of cessation attempts and abstinence differs by individual-level social factors such as race and ethnicity. Clinical treatment of nicotine dependence also continues to be challenged by individual-level variability in effectiveness to promote abstinence. The use of tailored smoking cessation strategies that incorporate information on individual-level social and genetic factors hold promise, although additional pharmacogenomic knowledge is still needed. In particular, genetic variants associated with pharmacological responses to smoking cessation treatment have generally been conducted in populations with participants that self-identify as White race or who are determined to be of European genetic ancestry. These results may not adequately capture the variability across all smokers as a result of understudied differences in allele frequencies across genetic ancestry populations. This suggests that much of the current pharmacogenetic study results for smoking cessation may not apply to all populations. Therefore, clinical application of pharmacogenetic results may exacerbate health inequities by racial and ethnic groups. This scoping review examines the extent to which racial, ethnic, and ancestral groups that experience differences in smoking rates and smoking cessation are represented in the existing body of published pharmacogenetic studies of smoking cessation. We will summarize results by race, ethnicity, and ancestry across pharmacological treatments and study designs. We will also explore current opportunities and challenges in conducting pharmacogenomic research on smoking cessation that encourages greater participant diversity, including practical barriers to clinical utilization of pharmacological smoking cessation treatment and clinical implementation of pharmacogenetic knowledge.

Pediatric considerations for pharmacogenetic selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors clinical decision support.

Pharmacogenetic testing for psychiatry is growing at a rapid pace, with multiple sites utilizing results to help clinical decision-making. Genotype-guided dosing and drug selection have been implemented at several sites, including Vanderbilt University Medical Center, where clinical decision support (CDS) based on pharmacogenetic results went live for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in 2020 for both adult and pediatric patients. Effective and appropriate implementation of CYP2D6- and CYP2C19-guided CDS for the pediatric population requires consideration of the evidence for the pharmacogenetic associations, medication indications, and appropriate alternative therapies to be used when a pharmacogenetic contraindication is identified. In this article, we review these pediatric pharmacogenetic considerations for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor CDS. We include a case study, the current literature supporting clinical recommendations, considerations when designing pediatric CDS, future implications, and examples of sertraline, (es)citalopram, paroxetine, and fluvoxamine alerts.

The effect of medication reconciliation on generating an accurate medication list in a pharmacogenomics practice

Medication reconciliation is recognized as a critically important medication safety element and a key initiative by multiple organizations. Within our precision medicine program, accurate medication lists are essential to our ability to make specific medication recommendations based on pharmacogenetic results. Our study aimed to identify discrepancies within the patient's medication list to improve medication management via genetic factors through a pharmacy team-based approach. A dedicated team of pharmacists and trained student pharmacists conducted telephone interviews to complete medication reconciliation for individuals enrolled in our precision medicine preemptive screening program. Medication list discrepancies were tracked as well as if pharmacogenetic consults were altered by findings during the telephone interviews. Medication reconciliation was completed on 465 participants who had recently received or were awaiting pharmacogenetic testing. We found similar results to previously described rates of medication list discrepancies with an average of 4.9 medication discrepancies per patient as well as greater than 90% of individuals having at least one medication discrepancy. Pharmacogenetic recommendations for 20 individuals (4.3%) required adjustment following medication reconciliation. This pilot program supports the value of a dedicated team for medication reconciliation and the importance of accurate medication lists to optimize precision medicine programs.

Variability Between Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC®) Guidelines and a Commercial Pharmacogenetics Laboratory in Genotype to Phenotype Interpretations For Patients Utilizing Psychotropics.

Clinical practice environments without in-house pharmacogenetic testing often rely on commercial laboratories, especially in the setting of pharmacogenetic testing intended to guide psychotropic use. There are occasionally differences in phenotype assignment and medication recommendations between commercial laboratories and the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC). This may be problematic as many institutions that implement pharmacogenetics consider CPIC to be an important source of guidelines for recommended prescribing actions based on genetics, as well as a tool towards standardizing pharmacogenetics implementation. Here, we completed a retrospective chart review of our academic health system’s (Michigan Medicine) electronic health record with the goal of comparing phenotypic assignment of CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotypes between the commercial pharmacogenetic lab used most at our institution, and CPIC. Ultimately, we identified 205 patients with available pharmacogenetic results from this lab. The prevalence of conflicting phenotype assignment was 28.8% for CYP2D6 and 32.2% for CYP2C19 genotypes when comparing the commercial lab to CPIC guidelines. In several cases, the phenotypic assignment differences for antidepressants led to significant differences in medication recommendations when comparing the commercial lab report and CPIC guidelines. These results may also have implications for medications outside of psychiatry with recommendations for dose adjustments based on CYP2D6 or CYP2C19 metabolizing phenotype.

Patients' Perceptions of Pharmacogenetic Testing and Access to Their Results: State of the Art in Spain and Systematic Review.

The process of clinical pharmacogenetics implementation depends on patients’ and general population’s perceptions. To date, no study has been published addressing Spanish patients’ opinions on pharmacogenetic testing, the availability of the results, and the need for signing informed consent. In this work, we contacted 146 patients that had been previously genotyped at our laboratory and 46 healthy volunteers that had participated in a bioequivalence clinical trial at the Clinical Pharmacology Department of Hospital Universitario de La Princesa and consented to pharmacogenetic testing for research purposes. From the latter, 108 and 34, respectively, responded to the questionnaire (i.e., a response rate of 74%); Participants were scheduled for a face-to-face, telephone, or videoconference interview and were asked a total of 27 questions in Spanish. Great or almost complete acceptance of pharmacogenetic testing was observed (99.3%), age and university education level being the main predictors of acceptance rates and understanding (multivariate analysis, p = 0.004, R2 = 0.17, age being inversely proportional to acceptance rates and understanding and university level being related to higher acceptance rates and understanding compared to other education levels). Mixed perceptions were observed on the requirement of written informed consent (55.6% in favor); therefore, it seems recommendable to continue requesting it for the upcoming years until more perceptions are collected. The majority of participants (95.8%) preferred storing pharmacogenetic results in medical records rather than in electronic sources (55.6%) and highly agreed with the possibility of carrying their results on a portable card (91.5%). Patients agreed to broad genetic testing, including biomarkers unrelated to their disease (93.7%) or with little clinically relevant evidence (94.4%). Patients apparently rely on clinician’s or pharmacogeneticist’s interpretation and seem, therefore, open to the generation of ethically challenging information. Finally, although most patients (68.3%) agreed with universal population testing, some were reluctant, probably due to the related costs and sustainability of the Spanish Health System. This was especially evident in the group of patients who were older and with a likely higher proportion of pensioners.

Pharmacogenetics to Avoid Adverse Reactions in Cardiology: Ready for Implementation?

Cardiovascular Diseases (CVs) are one of the main causes of mortality and disability around the world. Advances in drug treatment have greatly improved survival and quality of life in the past decades, but associated adverse events remain a relevant problem. Pharmacogenetics can help individualize cardiovascular treatment, reducing associated toxicities and improving outcomes. Several scientific societies and working groups periodically review available studies and provide consensus recommendations for those gene-drug pairs with a sufficient level of evidence. However, these recommendations are rarely mandatory, and the indications on how to adjust treatment can vary between different guidelines, which limits their clinical applicability. The aim of this review is to compile, compare and discuss available guidelines and recommendations by the main Pharmacogenetics Consortiums (Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC); Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG); the French Network of Pharmacogenetics (Réseau national de pharmacogénétique (RNPGx) and The Canadian Pharmacogenomics Network for Drug Safety (CPNDS) regarding how to apply pharmacogenetic results to optimize pharmacotherapy in cardiology. Pharmacogenetic recommendations included in European or American drug labels, as well as those included in the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the American College of Cardiology (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) treatment guidelines are also discussed.

Impact of Updating Pharmacogenetic Results: Lessons Learned from the PREDICT Program.

Pharmacogenomic (PGx) evidence for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) continues to evolve. For sites offering testing, maintaining up-to-date interpretations and implementing new clinical decision support (CDS) driven by existing results creates practical and technical challenges. Vanderbilt University Medical Center initiated panel testing in 2010, added CYP2D6 testing in 2017, and released CDS for SSRIs in 2020. We systematically reinterpreted historic CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 genotypes to update phenotypes to current nomenclature and to launch provider CDS and patient-oriented content for SSRIs. Chart review was conducted to identify and recontact providers caring for patients with current SSRI therapy and new actionable recommendations. A total of 15,619 patients’ PGx results were reprocessed. Of the non-deceased patients reprocessed, 21% (n = 3278) resulted in CYP2C19*1/*17 reinterpretations. Among 289 patients with an actionable recommendation and SSRI medication prescription, 31.8% (n = 92) did not necessitate contact of a clinician, while 43.2% (n = 125) resulted in clinician contacted, and for 25% (n = 72) no appropriate clinician was able to be identified. Maintenance of up-to-date interpretations and recommendations for PGx results over the lifetime of a patient requires continuous effort. Reprocessing is a key strategy for maintenance and expansion of PGx content to be periodically considered and implemented.

Pharmacogenetic testing to guide therapeutic decision-making and improve outcomes for children undergoing anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

Anthracyclines are widely used as part of chemotherapeutic regimens in paediatric oncology patients. The most serious adverse drug reaction caused by anthracycline use is cardiotoxicity, a serious condition that can lead to cardiac dysfunction and subsequent heart failure. Both clinical and genetic factors contribute to a patient's risk of experiencing anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. In particular, genetic variants in RARG, UGT1A6 and SLC28A3 have been consistently shown to influence an individual's risk of experiencing this reaction. By combining clinical and genetic risks, decision-making can be improved to optimize treatment and prevent potentially serious adverse drug reactions. As part of a precision medicine initiative, we used pharmacogenetic testing, focused on RARG, UGT1A6 and SLC28A3 variants, to help predict an individual's risk of experiencing anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity. Pharmacogenetic results are currently being used in clinical decision-making to inform treatment regimen choice, anthracycline dosing and decisions to initiate cardioprotective agents. In this case series, we demonstrate examples of the impact of genetic testing and discuss its potential to allow patients to be increasingly involved in their own treatment decisions.

Feasibility of preemptive pharmacogenetic testing in colorectal cancer patients within a community oncology setting.

Pharmacogenetics, in hand with precision medicine in oncology, represents an opportunity to holistically tailor a patient's treatment regimen using both somatic and germline variants to improve efficacy and decrease toxicity. Colorectal cancer patients represent a population with frequent use of fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan and are an ideal opportunity for implementation of preemptive pharmacogenetics as evidence supports pharmacogenetic testing for DPYD and UGT1A1 to reduce fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan toxicities. This was a single arm proof-of-concept study at a large community-based health system. Participants provided samples for pharmacogenetic testing via an external vendor prior to chemotherapy initiation and an oncology pharmacist was responsible for pharmacogenetic interpretation and pharmacogenetic-guided therapeutic recommendation to the treating provider. A total of 24 (60%) participants had a UGT1A1 variant. All participants (100%) were DPYD*1/*1. Results were available and interpreted for 29/40 (72.5%) participants prior to scheduled chemotherapy initiation (p value <0.014). Of the participants whose results were available in 5 weekdays or less (n = 23), 20 (87%) were communicated with the treating provider prior to scheduled chemotherapy administration. A total turnaround time of 5 days or less was significantly associated with PGx feasibility in a community-based oncology clinic (p = 0.03). In conclusion, we were able to show that implementation of preemptive pharmacogenetic testing into a community oncology clinic with results interpretation available prior to scheduled initiation of chemotherapy was feasible. As pharmacogenetic testing in oncology expands, pharmacists should be prepared to optimize supportive medication regimens as well as chemotherapy with pharmacogenetic results.

Phase II study of eribulin in combination with gemcitabine for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic triple negative breast cancer (ERIGE trial). Clinical and pharmacogenetic results on behalf of the Gruppo Oncologico Italiano di Ricerca Clinica (GOIRC)

BackgroundThe combination of a microtubule inhibitor (eribulin) with a nucleoside analog (gemcitabine) may synergistically induce tumor cell death, particularly in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) characterized by high cell proliferation, aggressive behavior, and chemo-resistance.Patients and methodsThis is an open-label, multicenter phase II study evaluating the combination of eribulin (0.88 mg/m2) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle as either first- or second-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic TNBC. The primary endpoint was the objective response for evaluable patients. A prospective, molecular correlative study was carried out to assess the role of germinal BRCA pathogenic variants and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in predicting efficacy and toxicity of the combination regimen.ResultsFrom July 2013 to September 2016, 83 evaluable patients were enrolled. They received a median number of six cycles of treatment. An overall response rate (ORR) of 37.3% (31 patients) was observed, with a complete response rate of 2.4% and a partial response rate of 34.9%; the clinical benefit rate was 48.8%. With a median follow-up of 28.8 months, the median response duration was 6.6 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.1 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 14.5 months. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were aminotransferase elevation (in 25% of the patients) and neutropenia (in 23.8%). Women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants were associated with worse ORR, PFS, and OS than BRCA1/2 wild-type carriers. CYP3A4 and FGD4 SNPs were associated with increased risk of liver toxicity. Three different SNPs in CDA∗2, RRM1, and CYP2C8 genes were significantly associated with poorer OS.ConclusionsThe combination of eribulin and gemcitabine showed promising activity and a moderate toxicity profile in metastatic TNBC. BRCA status and pharmacogenetics tests may help identify patients with high probability of response with negligible toxicity.EudraCT number2012-003505-10.

Effect of Pharmacogenetic Testing for Statin Myopathy Risk vs Usual Care on Blood Cholesterol

Nonadherence to statin guidelines is common. The solute carrier organic anion transporter family member 1B1 (SLCO1B1) genotype is associated with simvastatin myopathy risk and is proposed for clinical implementation. The unintended harms of using pharmacogenetic information to guide pharmacotherapy remain a concern for some stakeholders. To determine the impact of delivering SLCO1B1 pharmacogenetic results to physicians on the effectiveness of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) prevention (measured by low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] levels) and concordance with prescribing guidelines for statin safety and effectiveness. This randomized clinical trial was performed from December 2015 to July 2019 at 8 primary care practices in the Veterans Affairs Boston Healthcare System. Participants included statin-naive patients with elevated ASCVD risk. Data analysis was performed from October 2019 to September 2020. SLCO1B1 genotyping and results reporting to primary care physicians at baseline (intervention group) vs after 1 year (control group). The primary outcome was the 1-year change in LDL-C level. The secondary outcomes were 1-year concordance with American College of Cardiology-American Heart Association and Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for statin therapy and statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS). Among 408 patients (mean [SD] age, 64.1 [7.8] years; 25 women [6.1%]), 193 were randomized to the intervention group and 215 were randomized to the control group. Overall, 120 participants (29%) had a SLCO1B1 genotype indicating increased simvastatin myopathy risk. Physicians offered statin therapy to 65 participants (33.7%) in the intervention group and 69 participants (32.1%) in the control group. Compared with patients whose physicians did not know their SLCO1B1 results at baseline, patients whose physicians received the results had noninferior reductions in LDL-C at 12 months (mean [SE] change in LDL-C, -1.1 [1.2] mg/dL in the intervention group and -2.2 [1.3] mg/dL in the control group; difference, -1.1 mg/dL; 90% CI, -4.1 to 1.8 mg/dL; P < .001 for noninferiority margin of 10 mg/dL). The proportion of patients with American College of Cardiology-American Heart Association guideline-concordant statin prescriptions in the intervention group was noninferior to that in the control group (12 patients [6.2%] vs 14 patients [6.5%]; difference, -0.003; 90% CI, -0.038 to 0.032; P < .001 for noninferiority margin of 15%). All patients in both groups were concordant with CPIC guidelines for safe statin prescribing. Physicians documented 2 and 3 cases of SAMS in the intervention and control groups, respectively, none of which was associated with a CPIC guideline-discordant prescription. Among patients with a decreased or poor SLCO1B1 transporter function genotype, simvastatin was prescribed to 1 patient in the control group but none in the intervention group. Clinical testing and reporting of SLCO1B1 results for statin myopathy risk did not result in poorer ASCVD prevention in a routine primary care setting and may have been associated with physicians avoiding simvastatin prescriptions for patients at genetic risk for SAMS. Such an absence of harm should reassure stakeholders contemplating the clinical use of available pharmacogenetic results. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02871934.

How to Transition from Single-Gene Pharmacogenetic Testing to Preemptive Panel-Based Testing: A Tutorial.

There have been significant advancements in precision medicine and approaches to medication selection based on pharmacogenetic results. With the availability of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and growing awareness of genetic interindividual variability, patient demand for more precise, individually tailored drug regimens is increasing. The University of Florida (UF) Health Precision Medicine Program (PMP) was established in 2011 to improve integration of genomic data into clinical practice. In the ensuing years, the UF Health PMP has successfully implemented several single-gene tests to optimize the precision of medication prescribing across a variety of clinical settings. Most recently, the UF Health PMP launched a custom-designed pharmacogenetic panel, including pharmacogenes relevant to supportive care medications commonly prescribed to patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment, referred to as "GatorPGx." This tutorial provides guidance and information to institutions on how to transition from the implementation of single-gene pharmacogenetic testing to a preemptive panel-based testing approach. Here, we demonstrate application of the preemptive panel in the setting of an adult solid tumor oncology clinic. Importantly, the information included herein can be applied to other clinical practice settings.

Using pharmacogenetics to structure individual pain management protocols in total knee arthroplasty

The purpose of this study was to use pharmacogenetics to determine the frequency of genetic variants in our total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients that could affect postoperative pain medications. Pharmacogenetic testing evaluates patient DNA to determine if a drug is expected to have a normal clinical effect, heightened effect, or no effect at all on the patient. It also predicts whether patients are likely to experience side effects from medicine. We further sought to determine if changing the multimodal programme based on these results would improve pain control or reduce side effects. In this pilot study, buccal samples were collected from 31 primary TKA patients. Pharmacogenetics testing examined genetic variants in genes OPRM1, CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C19, CYP3A4, CYP2C9, and CYP2D6. These genes affect the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and opioids. We examined the frequency of genetic variants to any of the medications we prescribed including celecoxib, hydrocodone, and tramadol. Patients were randomized to one of two groups: the control group received the standard postoperative pain regimen, and the study group received a customized regimen based on the pharmacogenetic results. For the first ten postoperative days, patients recorded pain scores, medication, and side effects. Genetic variants involving one or more medications in the multimodal pain protocol occurred in 13 of the 31 patients (42%). In total, eight patients (26%) had variants affecting more than one of the medications. For the 25 patients who recorded pain and medication logs, the mean pain levels and morphine equivalents (MEQs) consumed in the first ten days were higher in the control group than in the custom-guided group (p = 0.019 for pain and p = 0.655 for MEQ). Overall, 42% of patients had a variant involving one of the pain medications prescribed in our perioperative pain program for TKA. Ongoing research will help determine if using these data to modify a patient's medication will improve outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6 Supple A):73-78.