Clinical utility of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing in depression: A Canadian patient- and rater-blinded, randomized, controlled trial.

The pharmacological treatment of depression consists of stages of trial and error, with less than 40% of patients achieving remission during first medication trial. However, in a large, randomized-controlled trial (RCT) in the U.S. ("GUIDED"), significant improvements in response and remission rates were observed in patients who received treatment guided by combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing, compared to treatment-as-usual (TAU). Here we present results from the Canadian "GAPP-MDD" RCT. This 52-week, 3-arm, multi-center, participant- and rater-blinded RCT evaluated clinical outcomes among patients with depression whose treatment was guided by combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing compared to TAU. The primary outcome was symptom improvement (change in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, HAM-D17) at week 8. Secondary outcomes included response (≥50% decrease in HAM-D17) and remission (HAM-D17 ≤ 7) at week 8. Numerically, patients in the guided-care arm had greater symptom improvement (27.6% versus 22.7%), response (30.3% versus 22.7%), and remission rates (15.7% versus 8.3%) compared to TAU, although these differences were not statistically significant. Given that the GAPP-MDD trial was ultimately underpowered to detect statistically significant differences in patient outcomes, it was assessed in parallel with the larger GUIDED RCT. We observed that relative improvements in response and remission rates were consistent between the GAPP-MDD (33.0% response, 89.0% remission) and GUIDED (31.0% response, 51.0% remission) trials. Together with GUIDED, the results from the GAPP-MDD trial indicate that combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing can be an effective tool to help guide depression treatment in the context of the Canadian healthcare setting (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02466477).

Mitochondria's role in sleep: Novel insights from sleep deprivation and restriction studies.

OBJECTIVES/METHODS: The biology underlying sleep is not yet fully elucidated, but it is known to be complex and largely influenced by circadian rhythms. Compelling evidence supports of a link among circadian rhythms, sleep and metabolism, which suggests a role for mitochondria. These organelles play a significant role in energy metabolism via oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and several mitochondrial enzymes display circadian oscillations. However, the interplay between mitochondria and sleep is not as well-known. This review summarises human and animal studies that have examined the role of mitochondria in sleep. Literature searches were conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar. RESULTS: Using various models of sleep deprivation, animal studies support the involvement of mitochondria in sleep via differential gene and protein expression patterns, OXPHOS enzyme activity, and morphology changes. Human studies are more limited but also show differences in OXPHOS enzyme activity and protein levels among individuals who have undergone sleep deprivation or suffer from different forms of insomnia. CONCLUSIONS: Taken altogether, both types of study provide evidence for mitochondria's involvement in the sleep-wake cycle. We briefly discuss the potential clinical implications of these studies.

Association Study of the Complement Component C4 Gene in Tardive Dyskinesia.

Tardive dyskinesia (TD) is a movement disorder that may develop in schizophrenia patients being treated long-term with antipsychotic medication. TD interferes with voluntary movements and leads to stigma, and can be associated with treatment non-adherence. The etiology of TD is unclear, but it appears to have a genetic component. There is emerging evidence of immune dysregulation in TD. In the current study, we set out to investigate the complex schizophrenia-associated complement component 4 (C4) gene for possible association with TD occurrence and TD severity as assessed by the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS) in a sample of 129 schizophrenia patients of European ancestry. We have genotyped the copy numbers of long and short forms of C4A and C4B gene variants in 129 European ancestry patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. We did not find predicted C4A or C4B expression to be nominally associated with TD risk or severity. However, we found the number of copies of C4BL to be nominally associated with TD severity (p = 0.020).

Genetic testing for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 suggests improved outcome for antidepressant and antipsychotic medication.

Individuals carrying genetic variants that result in non-extensive CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 enzyme activity seem to be more prone to non-response and side-effects of psychotropic medications. Therefore, tailoring prescriptions using genetic information may improve patient outcomes. This study examined treatment outcome in psychiatric care after CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genetic information was provided to patients and physicians. CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotyping, assessment of side effects and medical histories were obtained from 80 subjects who were prescribed either antidepressant or antipsychotic medications. Our measure of outcome was mainly physicians' opinions however UKU side effects scores were also used. For CYP2D6, we calculated an activity score based on genotype and psychiatric medications. Correlation analysis was performed for CYP2D6 activity scores and UKU scores. Overall, we received supportive responses from physicians who enrolled patients in our study. Notably, while almost every fourth physician reported improvement in patient outcome, not a single physician indicated that their patient's symptoms worsened after they had used a pharmacogenetic report to guide treatment. We did not observe statistically significant differences in side effects. Overall, our results suggest improved patient outcome following pharmacogenetic testing; nonetheless, more research is required to assess the exact benefit of pharmacogenetics in clinical practice.

Combinatorial pharmacogenomics and improved patient outcomes in depression: Treatment by primary care physicians or psychiatrists.

Failed medication trials are common in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD); however, the use of combinatorial pharmacogenomics to guide medication selection has been previously associated with improved outcomes in the psychiatric care setting. The utility of combinatorial pharmacogenomics in patients with MDD in primary care and psychiatric care settings was evaluated here. Patients enrolled in a naturalistic, open-label, prospective study [Individualized Medicine: Pharmacogenetics Assessment and Clinical Treatment (IMPACT)] with MDD were evaluated (N = 1871). Pharmacogenomic testing was performed for all patients and medications were categorized based on gene-drug interactions. Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) was evaluated at baseline and follow-up (weeks 8-12). Symptom improvement (percent decrease in BDI), response (≥50% decrease in BDI), and remission (BDI≤10) at follow-up were evaluated according to provider type and whether medications were genetically congruent (little/no gene-drug interactions). There was a 27.9% reduction in depression symptoms at follow-up, as well as response and remission rates of 25.7% and 15.2%, respectively. Outcomes were significantly better among patients treated by primary care providers versus psychiatrists (symptom improvement 31.7% versus 24.9%, p < 0.01; response rate 30.1% versus 22.3%, p < 0.01; remission rate 19.5% versus 12.0%, p < 0.01). There was a 31% relative improvement in response rate among patients taking congruent versus incongruent medications, with slightly higher congruence among primary care providers (87.6%) versus psychiatrists (85.2%). Following combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing, outcomes were significantly improved among patients treated by primary care providers compared to psychiatrists, which supports the use of pharmacogenomics in broader treatment settings.

Physicians' opinions following pharmacogenetic testing for psychotropic medication.

Pharmacogenetics seeks to improve patient drug response and decrease side effects by personalizing prescriptions using genetic information. Since 2012, by one estimate, the number of patients who have had pharmacogenetic testing has doubled and this number is expected to double again by 2015. Given the increasing evidence for genetic influences on treatment response, we deemed it important to study physicians' opinions of pharmacogenetic testing. Surveys were completed by 168 Canadian physicians who had ordered at least one pharmacogenetic test (in particular for CYP2D6 or CYP2C19) for the prescription of psychiatric medication. Our results indicated that 80% of respondents believe genetic testing would become common standard in psychiatric drug treatment and 76% of respondents reported satisfactory or higher than satisfactory understanding of the pharmacogenetic report provided. Significantly more male physicians believed they had a higher understanding of the pharmacogenetic report compared to female physicians. To our knowledge, this is the only study that has assessed physicians' opinions of pharmacogenetic testing for psychotropic medication after they had received a pharmacogenetic report. Our results demonstrate a positive opinion of physicians on pharmacogenetics and indicate great potential for future clinical application.