Pre-emptive Pharmacogenomic Testing Research Articles

Integration of a clinical pharmacist practitioner-led pharmacogenomics service in a Veterans Affairs hematology/oncology clinic.

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. This article describes the implementation and evaluation of pharmacogenomic testing within the hematology/oncology ambulatory care clinic at the William S. Middleton Memorial Veterans Hospital in Madison, WI. The Pharmacogenomic Testing for Veterans (PHASER) program provides preemptive pharmacogenomic testing for veterans nationally. Program implementation at the Madison Veterans Affairs site began in the hematology/oncology clinic with the goal of integrating the offer for pharmacogenomic testing, testing completion, and review of the results by the hematology/oncology clinical pharmacist practitioner (CPP) into current workflows to create a sustainable process for PHASER. The hematology/oncology CPP designed workflows outlining how testing would be offered to patients, how results would be reported and to whom, and how documentation would occur in the electronic medical record. Veterans are offered preemptive PHASER testing, before needing therapy requiring pharmacogenomic results. Exceptions to pharmacogenomic testing were patients with a history of liver or allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. This article provides a summary of the role of the hematology/oncology CPP in the implementation of a pharmacogenomics service and the impact on medication management in a hematology/oncology clinic.

Clinical impact of preemptive pharmacogenomic testing on antiplatelet therapy in a real-world setting.

CYP2C19 genotyping to guide antiplatelet therapy after patients develop acute coronary syndromes (ACS) or require percutaneous coronary interventions (PCIs) reduces the likelihood of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Evidence about the impact of preemptive testing, where genotyping occurs while patients are healthy, is lacking. In patients initiating antiplatelet therapy for ACS or PCI, we compared medical records data from 67 patients who received CYP2C19 genotyping preemptively (results >7 days before need), against medical records data from 67 propensity score-matched patients who received early genotyping (results within 7 days of need). We also examined data from 140 patients who received late genotyping (results >7 days after need). We compared the impact of genotyping approaches on medication selections, specialty visits, MACE and bleeding events over 1 year. Patients with CYP2C19 loss-of-function alleles were less likely to be initiated on clopidogrel if they received preemptive rather than early or late genotyping (18.2%, 66.7%, and 73.2% respectively, p = 0.001). No differences were observed by genotyping approach in the number of specialty visits or likelihood of MACE or bleeding events (all p > 0.21). Preemptive genotyping had a strong impact on initial antiplatelet selection and a comparable impact on patient outcomes and healthcare utilization, compared to genotyping ordered after a need for antiplatelet therapy had been identified.

Clinical implementation of preemptive pharmacogenomics in psychiatry

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) holds promise to revolutionize modern healthcare. Although there are several prospective clinical studies in oncology and cardiology, demonstrating a beneficial effect of PGx-guided treatment in reducing adverse drug reactions, there are very few such studies in psychiatry, none of which spans across all main psychiatric indications, namely schizophrenia, major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder. In this study we aim to investigate the clinical effectiveness of PGx-guided treatment (occurrence of adverse drug reactions, hospitalisations and re-admissions, polypharmacy) and perform a cost analysis of the intervention. We report our findings from a multicenter, large-scale, prospective study of pre-emptive genome-guided treatment named as PREemptive Pharmacogenomic testing for preventing Adverse drug REactions (PREPARE) in a large cohort of psychiatric patients (n=1076) suffering from schizophrenia, major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder. We show that patients with an actionable phenotype belonging to the PGx-guided arm (n=25) present with 34.1% less adverse drug reactions compared to patients belonging to the control arm (n=36), 41.2% less hospitalisations (n=110 in the PGx-guided arm versus n=187 in the control arm) and 40.5% less re-admissions (n=19 in the PGx-guided arm versus n=32 in the control arm), less duration of initial hospitalisations (n=3305 total days of hospitalisation in the PGx-guided arm from 110 patients, versus n=6517 in the control arm from 187 patients) and duration of hospitalisation upon readmission (n=579 total days of hospitalisation upon readmission in the PGx-guided arm, derived from 19 patients, versus n=928 in the control arm, from 32 patients respectively). It was also shown that in the vast majority of the cases, there was less drug dose administrated per drug in the PGx-guided arm compared to the control arm and less polypharmacy (n=124 patients prescribed with at least 4 psychiatric drugs in the PGx-guided arm versus n=143 in the control arm) and smaller average number of co-administered psychiatric drugs (2.19 in the PGx-guided arm versus 2.48 in the control arm. Furthermore, less deaths were reported in the PGx-guided arm (n=1) compared with the control arm (n=9). Most importantly, we observed a 48.5% reduction of treatment costs in the PGx-guided arm with a reciprocal slight increase of the quality of life of patients suffering from major depressive disorder (0.935 versus 0.925 QALYs in the PGx-guided and control arm, respectively). While only a small proportion (∼25%) of the entire study sample had an actionable genotype, PGx-guided treatment can have a beneficial effect in psychiatric patients with a reciprocal reduction of treatment costs. Although some of these findings did not remain significant when all patients were considered, our data indicate that genome-guided psychiatric treatment may be successfully integrated in mainstream healthcare. European Union Horizon 2020.

The Case for Pre-Emptive Pharmacogenetic Screening in South Africa.

Lack of equitable representation of global genetic diversity has hampered the implementation of genomic medicine in under-represented populations, including those on the African continent. Data from the multi-national Pre-emptive Pharmacogenomic Testing for Preventing Adverse Drug Reactions (PREPARE) study suggest that genotype guidance for prescriptions reduced the incidence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions (ADRs) by 30%. In this study, hospital dispensary trends from a tertiary South African (SA) hospital (Steve Biko Academic Hospital; SBAH) were compared with the drugs monitored in the PREPARE study. Dispensary data on 29 drugs from the PREPARE study accounted for ~10% of total prescriptions and ~9% of the total expenditure at SBAH. VigiLyze data from the South African Health Products Regulatory Authority were interrogated for local ADRs related to these drugs; 27 were listed as being suspected, concomitant, or interacting in ADR reports. Furthermore, a comparison of pharmacogene allele frequencies between African and European populations was used to frame the potential impact of pre-emptive pharmacogenetic screening in SA. Enumerating the benefit of pre-emptive pharmacogenetic screening in SA will only be possible once we initiate its full application. However, regional genomic diversity, disease burden, and first-line treatment options could be harnessed to target stratified PGx today.

Pharmacogenomic Considerations for Anticoagulant Prescription in Patients with Hereditary Haemorrhagic Telangiectasia.

Hereditary haemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is a vascular dysplasia that commonly results in bleeding but with frequent indications for therapeutic anticoagulation. Our aims were to advance the understanding of drug-specific intolerance and evaluate if there was an indication for pharmacogenomic testing. Genes encoding proteins involved in the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of warfarin, heparin, and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, and dabigatran were identified and examined. Linkage disequilibrium with HHT genes was excluded, before variants within these genes were examined following whole genome sequencing of general and HHT populations. The 44 genes identified included 5/17 actionable pharmacogenes with guidelines. The 76,156 participants in the Genome Aggregation Database v3.1.2 had 28,446 variants, including 9668 missense substitutions and 1076 predicted loss-of-function (frameshift, nonsense, and consensus splice site) variants, i.e., approximately 1 in 7.9 individuals had a missense substitution, and 1 in 71 had a loss-of-function variant. Focusing on the 17 genes relevant to usually preferred DOACs, similar variant profiles were identified in HHT patients. With HHT patients at particular risk of haemorrhage when undergoing anticoagulant treatment, we explore how pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing, alongside HHT gene testing, may prove beneficial in reducing the risk of bleeding and conclude that HHT patients are well placed to be at the vanguard of personalised prescribing.

Veterans Health Administration: Implementation of pharmacogenomic clinical decision support with statin medications and the SLCO1B1 gene as an exemplar.

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. To describe the implementation of clinical decision support tools for alerting prescribers of actionable drug-gene interactions in the Veterans Health Administration (VHA). Drug-gene interactions have been the focus of clinicians for years. Interactions between SCLO1B1 genotype and statin medications are of particular interest as these can inform risk for statin-associated muscle symptoms (SAMS). VHA identified approximately 500,000 new users of statin medications prescribed in VHA in fiscal year 2021, some of whom could benefit from pharmacogenomic testing for the SCLO1B1 gene. In 2019, VHA implemented the Pharmacogenomic Testing for Veterans (PHASER) program to offer panel-based, preemptive pharmacogenomic testing and interpretation. The PHASER panel includes SLCO1B1, and VHA utilized Clinical Pharmacogenomics Implementation Consortium statin guidelines to build its clinical decision support tools. The program's overarching goal is to reduce the risk of adverse drug reactions such as SAMS and improve medication efficacy by alerting practitioners of actionable drug-gene interactions. We describe the development and implementation of decision support for the SLCO1B1 gene as an example of the approach being used for the nearly 40 drug-gene interactions screened for by the panel. The VHA PHASER program identifies and addresses drug-gene interactions as an application of precision medicine to reduce veterans' risks for adverse events. The PHASER program's implementation of statin pharmacogenomics utilizes a patient's SCLO1B1 phenotype to alert providers of the risk for SAMS with the statin being prescribed and how to lower that risk through a lower dose or alternative statin selection. The PHASER program may help reduce the number of veterans who experience SAMS and may improve their adherence to statin medications.

A retrospective analysis of preemptive pharmacogenomic testing in 22,918 individuals from China

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) examines the influence of genetic variation on drug responses. With more and more Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines published, PGx is gradually shifting from the reactive testing of single gene toward the preemptive testing of multiple genes. But the profile of PGx genes, especially for the intra-country diversity, is not well understood in China. We retrospectively collected preemptive PGx testing data of 22,918 participants from 20 provinces of China, analyzed frequencies of alleles, genotypes and phenotypes of pharmacogenes, predicted drug responses for each participant, and performed comparisons between different provinces. After analyzing 15 pharmacogenes from CPIC guidelines of 31 drugs, we found that 99.97% of individuals may have an atypical response to at least one drug; the participants carry actionable genotypes leading to atypical dosage recommendation for a median of eight drugs. Over 99% of the participants were recommended a decreased warfarin dose based on genetic factors. There were 20 drugs with high-risk ratios from 0.18% to 58.25%, in which clopidogrel showed the highest high-risk ratio. In addition, the high-risk ratio of rasburicase in GUANGDONG (risk ratio (RR)=13.17, 95%CI:4.06-33.22, p < 0.001) and GUANGXI (RR=23.44, 95%CI:8.83-52.85, p < 0.001) were significantly higher than that in all provinces. Furthermore, the diversity we observed among 20 provinces suggests that preemptive PGx testing in different geographical regions in China may need to pay more attention to specific genes. These results emphasize the importance of preemptive PGx testing and provide essential evidence for promoting clinical implementation in China.

Implementation of pharmacogenomics into inpatient general medicine.

Pharmacogenomics is a crucial piece of personalized medicine. Preemptive pharmacogenomic testing is only used sparsely in the inpatient setting and there are few models to date for fostering the adoption of pharmacogenomic treatment in the inpatient setting. We created a multi-institutional project in Chicago to enable the translation of pharmacogenomics into inpatient practice. We are reporting our implementation process and barriers we encountered with solutions. This study, 'Implementation of Point-of-Care Pharmacogenomic Decision Support Accounting for Minority Disparities', sought to implement pharmacogenomics into inpatient practice at three sites: The University of Chicago, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, and the University of Illinois at Chicago. This study involved enrolling African American adult patients for preemptive genotyping across a panel of actionable germline variants predicting drug response or toxicity risk. We report our approach to implementation and the barriers we encountered engaging hospitalists and general medical providers in the inpatient pharmacogenomic intervention. Our strategies included: a streamlined delivery system for pharmacogenomic information, attendance at hospital medicine section meetings, use of physician and pharmacist champions, focus on hospitalists' care and optimizing system function to fit their workflow, hand-offs, and dealing with hospitalists turnover. Our work provides insights into strategies for the initial engagement of inpatient general medicine providers that we hope will benefit other institutions seeking to implement pharmacogenomics in the inpatient setting.

Clinician adherence to pharmacogenomics prescribing recommendations in clinical decision support alerts.

Thoughtful integration of interruptive clinical decision support (CDS) alerts within the electronic health record is essential to guide clinicians on the application of pharmacogenomic results at point of care. St. Jude Children's Research Hospital implemented a preemptive pharmacogenomic testing program in 2011 in a multidisciplinary effort involving extensive education to clinicians about pharmacogenomic implications. We conducted a retrospective analysis of clinicians' adherence to 4783 pharmacogenomically guided CDS alerts that triggered for 12 genes and 60 drugs. Clinicians adhered to the therapeutic recommendations provided in 4392 alerts (92%). In our population of pediatric patients with catastrophic illnesses, the most frequently presented gene/drug CDS alerts were TPMT/NUDT15 and thiopurines (n = 3850), CYP2D6 and ondansetron (n = 667), CYP2D6 and oxycodone (n = 99), G6PD and G6PD high-risk medications (n = 51), and CYP2C19 and proton pump inhibitors (omeprazole and pantoprazole; n = 50). The high adherence rate was facilitated by our team approach to prescribing and our collaborative CDS design and delivery.

Advancing Pharmacogenomics from Single-Gene to Preemptive Testing.

Pharmacogenomic testing can be an effective tool to enhance medication safety and efficacy. Pharmacogenomically actionable medications are widely used, and approximately 90-95% of individuals have an actionable genotype for at least one pharmacogene. For pharmacogenomic testing to have the greatest impact on medication safety and clinical care, genetic information should be made available at the time of prescribing (preemptive testing). However, the use of preemptive pharmacogenomic testing is associated with some logistical concerns, such as consistent reimbursement, processes for reporting preemptive results over an individual's lifetime, and result portability. Lessons can be learned from institutions that have implemented preemptive pharmacogenomic testing. In this review, we discuss the rationale and best practices for implementing pharmacogenomics preemptively.

Opportunity for pharmacogenomic testing in patients with cystic fibrosis.

Patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) are exposed to many drugs in their lifetime and many of these drugs have Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines that are available to guide dosing. Contemporary CF treatments are targeted to specific mutations in the CF transmembrane conductance regulator (CFTR) gene, and thus, require patients to have genetic testing before initiation of modulator therapy. However, aside from CFTR genetic testing, pharmacogenomic testing is not standard of care for CF patients. The aim of this study is to determine the number of non-CFTR modulator medications with CPIC guidelines that are prescribed to patients with CF. We identified all patients with a diagnosis of CF and queried our hospital electronic medical records (EMR) for all orders, including inpatient and prescriptions, for all drugs or drug classes that have CPIC actionable guidelines for drug-gene pairs that can be used to guide therapy. We identified 576 patients with a diagnosis of CF that were treated at our institution during this 16-year period between June 2005 and May 2021. Of these patients, 504 patients (87.5%) received at least one drug that could have been dosed according to CPIC guidelines if pharmacogenomic results would have been available. Patients with CF have high utilization of drugs with CPIC guidelines, therefore preemptive pharmacogenomic testing should be considered in CF patients at the time of CFTR genetic testing.

Adverse drug reactions reduced by nearly one third after genetic testing, major trial results to show

Carrying out pharmacogenomic testing before prescribing commonly prescribed drugs can slash adverse drug reactions by 30%, results of a major international study will show. Munir Pirmohamed, NHS chair of pharmacogenetics at the University of Liverpool and UK lead investigator on the ‘PREPARE’ (Preemptive Pharmacogenomic Testing for Preventing Adverse Drug Reactions) study, told delegates at the […]

Vincristine-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: Genetic Variation as a Potential Risk Factor.

Vincristine (VCR) is the first-line chemotherapeutic medication often co-administered with other drugs to treat childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Dose-dependent neurotoxicity is the main factor restricting VCR’s clinical application. VCR-induced peripheral neuropathy (VIPN) sometimes results in dose reduction or omission, leading to clinical complications or affecting the patient’s quality of life. With regard to the genetic basis of drug responses, preemptive pharmacogenomic testing and simultaneous blood level monitoring could be helpful for the transformation of various findings into individualized therapies. In this review, we discussed the potential associations between genetic variants in genes contributing to the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of VCR and VIPN incidence and severity in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Of note, genetic variants in the CEP72 gene have great potential to be translated into clinical practice. Such a genetic biomarker may help clinicians diagnose VIPN earlier. Besides, genetic variants in other genes, such as CYP3A5, ABCB1, ABCC1, ABCC2, TTPA, ACTG1, CAPG, SYNE2, SLC5A7, COCH, and MRPL47, have been reported to be associated with the VIPN, but more evidence is needed to validate the findings in the future. In fact, a variety of complex factors jointly determine the VIPN. In implementing precision medicine, the combination of genetic, environmental, and personal variables, along with therapeutic drug monitoring, will allow for a better understanding of the mechanisms of VIPN, improving the effectiveness of VCR treatment, reducing adverse reactions, and improving patients’ quality of life.

Underrepresented patient views and perceptions of personalized medication treatment through pharmacogenomics

Within an institutional pharmacogenomics implementation program, we surveyed 463 outpatients completing preemptive pharmacogenomic testing whose genetic results were available to providers for guiding medication treatment. We compared views and experiences from self-reported White and Black patients, including education level as a covariate across analyses. Black patients were less confident about whether their providers made personalized treatment decisions, and overwhelmingly wanted a greater role for their genetic information in clinical care. Both groups similarly reported that providers asked their opinions regarding medication changes, but White patients were more likely (59% vs. 49%, P = 0.005) to discuss the impact of personal/genetic makeup on medication response with providers, and Black patients reported initiating such discussions much less frequently (4% vs. 15%, P = 0.037). Opportunities exist for enhanced communication with underrepresented patients around personalized care. Tailored communication strategies and development of support tools employed in diverse healthcare settings may facilitate pharmacogenomically guided medication treatment that equitably benefits minority patient populations.

Patients dispensed medications with actionable pharmacogenomic biomarkers: rates and characteristics

Purpose.Pharmacogenomic biomarkers are increasingly listed on medication labels and authoritative guidelines but pharmacogenomic-guided prescribing is not yet common. Our objective was to assess the potential for incorporating knowledge of patients’ genomic characteristics into prescribing practices.Methods.We performed a retrospective analysis of claims data for 2,096,971 beneficiaries with pharmacy coverage from a national, commercial health insurance plan between January 2017 and December 2019. Children between 0 and 17 years comprised 21% of the cohort. Adults were age 18 to 64. Medications with actionable pharmacogenomic biomarkers (MAPB) were identified using public information from the FDA, CPIC, and PharmGKB.Results.MAPBs were dispensed to 63% of the adults and 29% of the children in the cohort. Most frequently dispensed were ibuprofen, ondansetron, codeine, and oxycodone. Most common were medications with CYP2D6, G6PD, or CYPC19 pharmacogenomic biomarkers. Ten percent of the cohort were co-dispensed more than one MAPB for at least 30 days.Conclusion.The number of people who might benefit from pharmacogenomic-guided prescribing is substantial. Future work should address obstacles to integrating genomic data into prescriber workflows, complex factors contributing to the magnitude of benefit, and the clinical availability of reliable on-demand or preemptive pharmacogenomic testing.

Impact and applicability of pharmacogenomics in rheumatology: an integrated analysis.

Rheumatology medications are often associated with adverse drug reactions (ADRs) or inadequate response (IR). Pharmacogenomics may be a solution, but there is limited knowledge of its potential utility within rheumatology. We analysed medication changes and pharmacogenomically actionable prescriptions for all adult rheumatology outpatient encounters at our medical centre between 10/2012-12/2018. Three sources defined pharmacogenomic actionability: FDA labels, Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines, and our institutionally-deliverable pharmacogenomic clinical decision support (CDS) summaries. A subset of patients (validation cohort) had previously undergone broad, preemptive pharmacogenomic testing within other clinics but results were unavailable within rheumatology. We assessed the occurrence of specific pharmacogenomic ADRs/IRs in this group. From 174,834 prescribing events, 6300/7761 patients (81%) had clinically actionable pharmacogenomic drug prescriptions (i.e. institutional CDS summaries would have been deployable if testing had been done). Using more conservative standards (pharmacogenomically actionable by ≥2 guidance bodies), 4158/7761 (54%) patient prescriptions could have been impacted. The greatest proportions of potentially impacted rheumatologic prescriptions were for tramadol (47%), allopurinol (21%), azathioprine (17%) and celecoxib (8%). Among our validation cohort (94 previously-genotyped patients), 29 (31%) patients had a pharmacogenomic genotype that would have cautioned possible ADRs/IRs for ≥1 medication. Four patients actually suffered ADRs/IRs that would have been predicted by preemptive genotyping. Pharmacogenomic genotyping could inform prescribing for the majority of rheumatology patients and may prevent a subset of ADRs/IRs. These findings justify prospective evaluation of pharmacogenomic testing including assessment of cost-effectiveness in selected rheumatology populations to further understand impact on therapy-related toxicities and treatment outcomes.

Pharmacogenetics in Psychiatry: An Update on Clinical Usability.

Using pharmacogenetics in guiding drug therapy experiences a steady increase in uptake, although still leads to discussions as to its clinical use. Psychiatry constitutes a field where pharmacogenomic testing might help in guiding drug therapy. To address current challenges, this minireview provides an update regarding genotyping (SNP analysis/arrays/NGS), structural variant detection (star-alleles/CNVs/hybrid alleles), genotype-to-phenotype translations, cost-effectiveness, and actionability of results (FDA/CPIC/PharmGKB) regarding clinical importance of pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing for prescription of antidepressants and antipsychotics.

Generating evidence for precision medicine: considerations made by the Ubiquitous Pharmacogenomics Consortium when designing and operationalizing the PREPARE study.

ObjectivesPharmacogenetic panel-based testing represents a new model for precision medicine. A sufficiently powered prospective study assessing the (cost-)effectiveness of a panel-based pharmacogenomics approach to guide pharmacotherapy is lacking. Therefore, the Ubiquitous Pharmacogenomics Consortium initiated the PREemptive Pharmacogenomic testing for prevention of Adverse drug Reactions (PREPARE) study. Here, we provide an overview of considerations made to mitigate multiple methodological challenges that emerged during the design.MethodsAn evaluation of considerations made when designing the PREPARE study across six domains: study aims and design, primary endpoint definition and collection of adverse drug events, inclusion and exclusion criteria, target population, pharmacogenomics intervention strategy, and statistical analyses.ResultsChallenges and respective solutions included: (1) defining and operationalizing a composite primary endpoint enabling measurement of the anticipated effect, by including only severe, causal, and drug genotype-associated adverse drug reactions; (2) avoiding overrepresentation of frequently prescribed drugs within the patient sample while maintaining external validity, by capping drugs of enrolment; (3) designing the pharmacogenomics intervention strategy to be applicable across ethnicities and healthcare settings; and (4) designing a statistical analysis plan to avoid dilution of effect by initially excluding patients without a gene–drug interaction in a gatekeeping analysis.ConclusionOur design considerations will enable quantification of the collective clinical utility of a panel of pharmacogenomics-markers within one trial as a proof-of-concept for pharmacogenomics-guided pharmacotherapy across multiple actionable gene–drug interactions. These considerations may prove useful to other investigators aiming to generate evidence for precision medicine.

Longitudinal exposure of English primary care patients to pharmacogenomic drugs: An analysis to inform design of pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing.

To investigate the longitudinal exposure of English primary care patients to pharmacogenomic drugs to inform design of pre-emptive testing. Sixty-three drugs were identified with dosing guidelines based on variants of 19 pharmacogenes in the Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase on 01 September 2018. Prescribing of these pharmacogenomic drugs between 1993 and 2017 was summarised for a sample of 648 141 English patients aged 50-99 years on 01 January 2013, registered with Clinical Practice Research Datalink practices during 2011-12. Exposure of patients to pharmacogenomic drugs retrospectively (2, 10, 20 y) and prospectively (5 y) was described. During 2011-12, 58% of patients were prescribed at least 1 pharmacogenomic drug, increasing to 80% over the previous 20 years. Multiple exposure was common, with 47% patients prescribed ≥2 pharmacogenomic drugs and 7% prescribed ≥5 pharmacogenomic drugs over the next 5 years. The likelihood of exposure to pharmacogenomic drugs increased with age, with 89% patients ≥70 years prescribed at least 1 pharmacogenomic drug over the previous 20 years. Even among those aged 50-59 years, 71% were prescribed at least 1 pharmacogenomic drug over the previous 20 years. The pharmacogenomic drugs prescribed to the most patients were for pain relief, gastroprotection, psychiatric and cardiovascular conditions. Three pharmacogenes (CYP2D6, CYP2C19 and SLCO1B1) accounted for >95% pharmacogenomic drugs prescribed. In primary care patients, exposure to pharmacogenomic drugs is extremely common, multiplicitous and has commenced by relatively early adulthood. A small number of pharmacogenes account for the majority of drugs prescribed. These findings could inform design of pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing for implementation in primary care.

Patient-provider communications about pharmacogenomic results increase patient recall of medication changes.

Effective doctor-patient communication is critical for disease management, especially when considering genetic information. We studied patient-provider communications after implementing a point-of-care pharmacogenomic results delivery system to understand whether pharmacogenomic results are discussed and whether medication recall is impacted. Outpatients undergoing preemptive pharmacogenomic testing (cases), non-genotyped controls, and study providers were surveyed from October 2012-May 2017. Patient responses were compared between visits where pharmacogenomic results guided prescribing versus visits where pharmacogenomics did not guide prescribing. Provider knowledge of pharmacogenomics, before and during study participation, was also analyzed. Both providers and case patients frequently reported discussions of genetic results after visits where pharmacogenomic information guided prescribing. Importantly, medication changes from visits where pharmacogenomics influenced prescribing were more often recalled than non-pharmacogenomic guided medication changes (OR=3.3 [1.6–6.7], p=0.001). Case patients who had separate visits where pharmacogenomics did and did not respectively influence prescribing more often remembered medication changes from visits where genomic-based guidance was used (OR=3.4 [1.2–9.3], p=0.02). Providers also displayed dramatic increases in personal genomic understanding through program participation (94% felt at least somewhat informed about pharmacogenomics post-participation, compared to 61% at baseline, p=0.04). Using genomic information during prescribing increases patient-provider communications, patient medication recall, and provider understanding of genomics, important ancillary benefits to clinical use of pharmacogenomics.