Pharmacogenetics in Italy: current landscape and future prospects.

Pharmacogenetics investigates sequence of genes that affect drug response, enabling personalized medication. This approach reduces drug-induced adverse reactions and improves clinical effectiveness, making it a crucial consideration for personalized medical care. Numerous guidelines, drawn by global consortia and scientific organizations, codify genotype-driven administration for over 120 active substances. As the scientific community acknowledges the benefits of genotype-tailored therapy over traditionally agnostic drug administration, the push for its implementation into Italian healthcare system is gaining momentum. This evolution is influenced by several factors, including the improved access to patient genotypes, the sequencing costs decrease, the growing of large-scale genetic studies, the rising popularity of direct-to-consumer pharmacogenetic tests, and the continuous improvement of pharmacogenetic guidelines. Since EMA (European Medicines Agency) and AIFA (Italian Medicines Agency) provide genotype information on drug leaflet without clear and explicit clinical indications for gene testing, the regulation of pharmacogenetic testing is a pressing matter in Italy. In this manuscript, we have reviewed how to overcome the obstacles in implementing pharmacogenetic testing in the clinical practice of the Italian healthcare system. Our particular emphasis has been on germline testing, given the absence of well-defined national directives in contrast to somatic pharmacogenetics.

ANO2 Genetic Variants and Anti-VEGF Treatment Response in Neovascular AMD: A Pharmacogenetic Substudy of VIEW 1 and VIEW 2.

Purpose: This analysis investigated potential associations between gene variants and clinical end points in the VIEW 1 and 2 randomized clinical trials of intravitreal aflibercept and ranibizumab in neovascular age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Methods: A genome-wide association analysis was conducted in a subgroup of patients from VIEW 1 and 2 consenting to the optional pharmacogenetic analysis. Results: Data were pooled from 780 samples from patients representative of the overall VIEW 1 and 2 populations. After Bonferroni correction for multiplicity and statistical adjustment for baseline risk factors, no significant associations were found between previously identified prognostic AMD gene variants and treatment response according to key prespecified VIEW 1 and 2 end points. Genome-wide, there were no significant genetic associations in patients experiencing gains of ≥15 Early Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy Study letters after 1 or 2 years of treatment. A cluster of variants in ANO2 (encoding anoctamin 2, a calcium-activated chloride channel expressed on photoreceptor cells) on chromosome 12 reached the level of significance for loss of ≥5 letters after 1 year of treatment (P < 5 × 10-8), with the ANO2 rs2110166 SNP demonstrating highly significant association (P = 1.99 × 10-8). Carriers of the ANO2 rs2110166 TT genotype showed a robust increase in visual acuity versus baseline compared with a small decrease in those with the TC genotype. Conclusions: None of the potential prognostic candidate genes were associated with the clinical end points for treated patients. Preliminary analyses suggest an association of ANO2 with retinal function, with a potential impact on vision of approximately one line over at least the first year. Further investigation of the function of ANO2 in retinal pathophysiology is merited.

A qualitative approach to assess the opinion of physicians about the challenges and prospects of pharmacogenomic testing implementation in clinical practice in Greece.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenomics (PGx) constitutes an important part of personalized medicine and has several clinical applications. PGx role in clinical practice is known, however, it has not been widely adopted yet. In this study, we aim to investigate the perspectives of Greek physicians regarding the implementation of PGx testing in clinical practice and the key issues associated with it. METHODS: Fourteen interviews were conducted with physicians of various specialties for which PGx applications are available. A semi-structured interview guide was utilized based on the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) context and the Diffusion of Innovation model. Transcripts were coded independently and compared by two members of the research team. Descriptive statistics were generated using Microsoft Excel. RESULTS: Six main themes emerged: awareness and use of PGx testing; source of information; key stakeholders of the PGx supply chain, their interactions and change agents; clinical benefit and significance of PGx testing; barriers and lack of reimbursement; and recommendations to boost the PGx adoption rate. Most respondents were aware of PGx applications, but only three had already recommended PGx testing. Peer-reviewed journals along with clinical guidelines were regarded as the most used source of information while stakeholders of the PGx supply chain were discussed. PGx was considered that promote patient-centered care, enhance medication clinical effectiveness, decrease the risk of side effects, and reduce healthcare costs. Lack of reimbursement, scarcity of resources, and high PGx cost were the foremost barriers affecting PGx adoption. CONCLUSIONS: It was concluded that if case PGx testing is reimbursed and physicians' training is reinforced, PGx implementation will be boosted and improved shortly.

Pharmacogenetic Study of Drugs Affecting Mycobacterium tuberculosis.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenetic research has led to significant progress in understanding how genetic factors influence drug response in tuberculosis (TB) treatment. One ongoing challenge is the variable occurrence of adverse drug reactions in some TB patients. Previous studies have indicated that genetic variations in the N-acetyltransferase 2 (NAT2) and solute carrier organic anion transporter family member 1B1 (SLCO1B1) genes can impact the blood concentrations of the first-line anti-TB drugs isoniazid (INH) and rifampicin (RIF), respectively. This study aimed to investigate the influence of pharmacogenetic markers in the NAT2 and SLCO1B1 genes on TB treatment outcomes using whole-exome sequencing (WES) analysis. METHODS: DNA samples were collected from 30 healthy Iranian adults aged 18-40 years. The allelic frequencies of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the NAT2 and SLCO1B1 genes were determined through WES. RESULTS: Seven frequent SNPs were identified in the NAT2 gene (rs1041983, rs1801280, rs1799929, rs1799930, rs1208, rs1799931, rs2552), along with 16 frequent SNPs in the SLCO1B1 gene (rs2306283, rs11045818, rs11045819, rs4149056, rs4149057, rs2291075, rs201722521, rs11045852, rs11045854, rs756393362, rs11045859, rs74064211, rs201556175, rs34671512, rs71581985, rs4149085). CONCLUSION: Genetic variations in NAT2 and SLCO1B1 can affect the metabolism of INH and RIF, respectively. A better understanding of the pharmacogenetic profile in the study population may facilitate the design of more personalized and effective TB treatment strategies. Further research is needed to directly correlate these genetic markers with clinical outcomes in TB patients.

Pharmacogenomic studies of fertility outcomes in pediatric cancer survivors - A systematic review.

For the same age, sex, and dosage, there can be significant variation in fertility outcomes in childhood cancer survivors. Genetics may explain this variation. This study aims to: (i) review the genetic contributions to infertility, (ii) search for pharmacogenomic studies looking at interactions of cancer treatment, genetic predisposition and fertility-related outcomes. Systematic searches in MEDLINE Ovid, Embase Classic+Embase, and PubMed were conducted using the following selection criteria: (i) pediatric, adolescent, and young adult cancer survivors, below 25 years old at the time of diagnosis, (ii) fertility outcome measures after cancer therapy, (iii) genetic considerations. Studies were excluded if they were (i) conducted in animal models, (ii) were not published in English, (iii) editorial letters, (iv) theses. Articles were screened in Covidence by at least two independent reviewers, followed by data extraction and a risk of bias assessment using the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool. Eight articles were reviewed with a total of 29 genes. Outcome measures included sperm concentration, azoospermia, AMH levels, assessment of premature menopause, ever being pregnant or siring a pregnancy. Three studies included replication cohorts, which attempted replication of SNP findings for NPY2R, BRSK1, FANCI, CYP2C19, CYP3A4, and CYP2B6. Six studies were rated with a high risk of bias. Differing methods may explain a lack of replication, and small cohorts may have contributed to few significant findings. Larger, prospective longitudinal studies with an unbiased genome-wide focus will be important to replicate significant results, which can be applied clinically.

Pharmacogenetic Testing or Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: A Quantitative Framework.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenetic profiling and therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) have both been proposed to manage inter-individual variability (IIV) in drug exposure. However, determining the most effective approach for estimating exposure for a particular drug remains a challenge. This study aimed to quantitatively assess the circumstances in which pharmacogenetic profiling may outperform TDM in estimating drug exposure, under three sources of variability (IIV, inter-occasion variability [IOV], and residual unexplained variability [RUV]). METHODS: Pharmacokinetic models were selected from the literature corresponding to drugs for which pharmacogenetic profiling and TDM are both clinically considered approaches for dose individualization. The models were used to simulate relevant drug exposures (trough concentration or area under the curve [AUC]) under varying degrees of IIV, IOV, and RUV. RESULTS: Six drug cases were selected from the literature. Model-based simulations demonstrated that the percentage of patients for whom pharmacogenetic exposure prediction is superior to TDM differs for each drug case: tacrolimus (11.0%), tamoxifen (12.7%), efavirenz (49.2%), vincristine (49.6%), risperidone (48.1%), and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (100%). Generally, in the presence of higher unexplained IIV in combination with lower RUV and IOV, exposure was best estimated by TDM, whereas, under lower unexplained IIV in combination with higher IOV or RUV, pharmacogenetic profiling was preferred. CONCLUSIONS: For the drugs with relatively low RUV and IOV (e.g., tamoxifen and tacrolimus), TDM estimated true exposure the best. Conversely, for drugs with similar or lower unexplained IIV (e.g., efavirenz or 5-FU, respectively) combined with relatively high RUV, pharmacogenetic profiling provided the most accurate estimate for most patients. However, genotype prevalence and the relative influence of genotypes on the PK, as well as the ability of TDM to accurately estimate AUC with a limited number of samples, had an impact. The results could be used to support clinical decision making when considering other factors, such as the probability for severe side effects.

Rationale and design for a pragmatic randomized trial to assess gene-based prescribing for SSRIs in the treatment of depression.

Specific selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) metabolism is strongly influenced by two pharmacogenes, CYP2D6 and CYP2C19. However, the effectiveness of prospectively using pharmacogenetic variants to select or dose SSRIs for depression is uncertain in routine clinical practice. The objective of this prospective, multicenter, pragmatic randomized controlled trial is to determine the effectiveness of genotype-guided selection and dosing of antidepressants on control of depression in participants who are 8 years or older with ≥3 months of depressive symptoms who require new or revised therapy. Those randomized to the intervention arm undergo pharmacogenetic testing at baseline and receive a pharmacy consult and/or automated clinical decision support intervention based on an actionable phenotype, while those randomized to the control arm have pharmacogenetic testing at the end of 6-months. In both groups, depression and drug tolerability outcomes are assessed at baseline, 1 month, 3 months (primary), and 6 months. The primary end point is defined by change in Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression score assessed at 3 months versus baseline. Secondary end points include change inpatient health questionnaire (PHQ-8) measure of depression severity, remission rates defined by PROMIS score < 16, medication adherence, and medication side effects. The primary analysis will compare the PROMIS score difference between trial arms among those with an actionable CYP2D6 or CYP2C19 genetic result or a CYP2D6 drug-drug interaction. The trial has completed accrual of 1461 participants, of which 562 were found to have an actionable phenotype to date, and follow-up will be complete in April of 2024.

Pharmacogenomics in primary care: a quality improvement project at Alconbury and Brampton surgeries 2019-2023.

BACKGROUND: Treatment of depression is common in primary care but not every antidepressant is effective in every patient. Adverse drug reactions are common, imposing a substantial burden on the patient and the NHS. Pharmacogenomics (PGx) utilises an individual's genetic makeup to predict their response to medications. By tailoring prescriptions to a person's genetic profile, PGx can significantly reduce adverse drug reactions, identify non-responders to medications, and enhance overall patient outcomes. AIM: To see if PGx testing for antidepressants can be undertaken in general practice as part of 'usual care'; to increase GP and patient awareness of PGx testing; to alter patient treatment according to the results of testing; and to sustain these changes at 4 years. METHOD: In 2019, 23 patients were recruited by GPs at the surgery. They consented and had cheek swabs to check their genetic profile to common antidepressants. Results were reviewed at 1 week by the GP and patient, treatment changes made and reviewed again at 4 years. RESULTS: On the CYP2D pathway, 19/23 patients were extensive (normal) metabolisers, one intermediate and two poor. These two had their treatments changed. At 4-year review 19/23 were on appropriate treatment (two had been stopped) but two had inappropriate drug treatment. On CYP2C19 pathway, 10/23 were normal metabolisers, eight intermediate, zero poor but five ultrarapid (they had their treatment changed). At 4-year review, 20/23 were on appropriate treatment (two stopped) and one inappropriate. CONCLUSION: PGx testing works in primary care, improving patient outcomes sustainably.

Pharmacogenetic testing in primary care could bolster depression treatment: A value proposition.

Pharmacogenetic testing could reduce the time to identify a safe and effective medication for depression; however, it is underutilized in practice. Major depression constitutes the most common mental disorder in the US, and while antidepressant therapy can help, the current trial -and error approach can require patients to endure multiple medication trials before finding one that is effective. Tailoring the fit of pharmacogenetic testing with prescribers' needs across a variety of settings could help to establish a generalizable value proposition to improve likelihood of adoption. We conducted a study to explore the value proposition for health systems using pharmacogenetic testing for mental health medications through prescribers' real-world experiences using implementation science concepts and systematic interviews with prescribers and administrators from four health care systems. To identify a value proposition, we organized the themes according to the Triple Aim framework, a leading framework for health care policy which asserts that high-value care should focus on three key metrics: (1) better health care quality and (2) population-level outcomes with (3) reduced per capita costs. Primary care providers whom we interviewed said that they value pharmacogenetic testing because it would provide more information about medications that they can prescribe, expanding their ability to identify medications that best-fit patients and reducing their reliance on referrals to specialists; they said that this capacity would help meet patients' needs for access to mental health care through primary care. At the same time, prescribers expressed differing views about how pharmacogenetic testing can help with quality of care and whether their views about out-of-pocket cost would prevent them from offering it. Thus, implementation should focus on integrating pharmacogenetic testing into primary care and using strategies to support prescribers' interactions with patients.

Pharmacogenomic analysis in adrenocortical carcinoma reveals genetic features associated with mitotane sensitivity and potential therapeutics.

Background: Adrenocortical carcinoma (ACC) is an aggressive endocrine malignancy with limited therapeutic options. Treating advanced ACC with mitotane, the cornerstone therapy, remains challenging, thus underscoring the significance to predict mitotane response prior to treatment and seek other effective therapeutic strategies. Objective: We aimed to determine the efficacy of mitotane via an in vitro assay using patient-derived ACC cells (PDCs), identify molecular biomarkers associated with mitotane response and preliminarily explore potential agents for ACC. Methods: In vitro mitotane sensitivity testing was performed in 17 PDCs and high-throughput screening against 40 compounds was conducted in 8 PDCs. Genetic features were evaluated in 9 samples using exomic and transcriptomic sequencing. Results: PDCs exhibited variable sensitivity to mitotane treatment. The median cell viability inhibition rate was 48.4% (IQR: 39.3-59.3%) and -1.2% (IQR: -26.4-22.1%) in responders (n=8) and non-responders (n=9), respectively. Median IC50 and AUC were remarkably lower in responders (IC50: 53.4 µM vs 74.7 µM, P<0.0001; AUC: 158.0 vs 213.5, P<0.0001). Genomic analysis revealed CTNNB1 somatic alterations were only found in responders (3/5) while ZNRF3 alterations only in non-responders (3/4). Transcriptomic profiling found pathways associated with lipid metabolism were upregulated in responder tumors whilst CYP27A1 and ABCA1 expression were positively correlated to in vitro mitotane sensitivity. Furthermore, pharmacologic analysis identified that compounds including disulfiram, niclosamide and bortezomib exhibited efficacy against PDCs. Conclusion: ACC PDCs could be useful for testing drug response, drug repurposing and guiding personalized therapies. Our results suggested response to mitotane might be associated with the dependency on lipid metabolism. CYP27A1 and ABCA1 expression could be predictive markers for mitotane response, and disulfiram, niclosamide and bortezomib could be potential therapeutics, both warranting further investigation.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impacts of germline pharmacogenomics on severe toxicity and symptom burden in adult patients with cancer.

The clinical application of Pharmacogenomics (PGx) has improved patient safety. However, comprehensive PGx testing has not been widely adopted in clinical practice, and significant opportunities exist to further optimize PGx in cancer care. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the safety outcomes of reported PGx-guided strategies (Analysis 1) and identify well-studied emerging pharmacogenomic variants that predict severe toxicity and symptom burden (Analysis 2) in patients with cancer. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to January 2023 for clinical trials or comparative studies evaluating PGx strategies or unconfirmed pharmacogenomic variants. The primary outcomes were severe adverse events (SAE; ≥ grade 3) or symptom burden with pain and vomiting as defined by trial protocols and assessed by trial investigators. We calculated pooled overall relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) using random effects models. PROSPERO, registration number CRD42023421277. Of 6811 records screened, six studies were included for Analysis 1, 55 studies for Analysis 2. Meta-analysis 1 (five trials, 1892 participants) showed a lower absolute incidence of SAEs with PGx-guided strategies compared to usual therapy, 16.1% versus 34.0% (RR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.57-0.91, p = 0.006, I2 = 34%). Meta-analyses 2 identified nine medicine(class)-variant pairs of interest across the TYMS, ABCB1, UGT1A1, HLA-DRB1, and OPRM1 genes. Application of PGx significantly reduced rates of SAEs in patients with cancer. Emergent medicine-variant pairs herald further research into the expansion and optimization of PGx to improve systemic anti-cancer and supportive care medicine safety and efficacy.

Association of Pharmacogenomic Phenotypes in CYP2D6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, and CYP3A5 on Polypharmacy in Veterans.

The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) utilizes a pharmacogenomic (PGx) program that analyzes specific "pharmacogenes." This study evaluates the effect that pharmacogenes may have on prevalence of polypharmacy. This retrospective cohort study included patients with VA prescriptions who underwent PGx testing. We quantified prescriptions active or recently expired at the time of PGx testing. We constructed two co-primary polypharmacy (≥10 medications) end points: (i) based on all medications and (ii) requiring that at least one medication was affected by a pharmacogene of interest. Pharmacogenes and actionable phenotypes of interest included poor and ultrarapid metabolizers for CYP2D6, CYP2C9, and CYP2C19 and intermediate and normal metabolizers for CYP3A5. Patients were classified as having 0, 1, and 2+ total phenotypes across all genes. Of the 15,144 patients screened, 13,116 met eligibility criteria. Across phenotype cohorts, there was no significant association with polypharmacy using all medications, number of total medications, or number of medications affected by phenotypes. However, there was a significant difference in patients with polypharmacy prescribed ≥1 medication impacted by PGx across phenotype groups: 2,514/4,949 (51%), 1,349/2,595 (52%), 204/350 (58%) (P = 0.03, OR 1.31, 95% CI 1.02-1.67). The median number of medications affected by PGx phenotypes with ≥1 PGx-impacted medication across phenotype groups was a median of 0 (IQR 0, 0), 0 (IQR 0, 0), and 1 (IQR 0, 1) (P < 0.001). In patients prescribed ≥1 medication impacted by PGx, those with more actionable pharmacogenomic phenotypes were more likely to meet polypharmacy criteria.

Effect of pharmacogenomic testing on the clinical treatment of patients with depressive disorder: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy is one of the primary treatment modalities for depression. However, there is considerable variability in the individual response to antidepressant medications. Personalized medicine guided by pharmacogenomic testing may hold promise in addressing this issue. METHODS: In this study, 665 depressive patients were randomly enrolled into two groups: the pharmacogenomic testing group (n = 333) and the control group (n = 332). In the testing group, participants underwent pharmacogenomic testing, and clinicians customized the treatment plan with the result, while the control group relied solely on clinicians' experience. The primary outcomes were the proportion of remission and response, assessed with Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS). The secondary outcomes included changes in HDRS scores over time and frequency of adverse drug reactions by the participants. RESULTS: At week 8, the pharmacogenomic testing group showed significantly higher remission rates (24.0 % v.s. 15.1 %; RR = 1.117; P = 0.007) and response rates (39.3 % v.s. 25.7 %; RR = 1.225; P < 0.001) compared to the control group. By week 12, the pharmacogenomic testing group continued to demonstrate significant advantages in remission (31.0 % v.s. 20.0 %; RR = 1.159; P = 0.003) and response (48.7 % v.s. 37.3 %; RR = 1.224; P = 0.006). Additionally, adverse drug reactions were less frequent in the pharmacogenomic testing group. LIMITATIONS: This study is not blind to clinicians and it's a single-center study. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacogenomic testing-guided drug therapy can provide greater assistance in the treatment of depression.

QPGx-CARES: Qatar pharmacogenetics clinical applications and research enhancement strategies.

Pharmacogenetic (PGx)-informed medication prescription is a cutting-edge genomic application in contemporary medicine, offering the potential to overcome the conventional "trial-and-error" approach in drug prescription. The ability to use an individual's genetic profile to predict drug responses allows for personalized drug and dosage selection, thereby enhancing the safety and efficacy of treatments. However, despite significant scientific and clinical advancements in PGx, its integration into routine healthcare practices remains limited. To address this gap, the Qatar Genome Program (QGP) has embarked on an ambitious initiative known as QPGx-CARES (Qatar Pharmacogenetics Clinical Applications and Research Enhancement Strategies), which aims to set a roadmap for optimizing PGx research and clinical implementation on a national scale. The goal of QPGx-CARES initiative is to integrate PGx testing into clinical settings with the aim of improving patient health outcomes. In 2022, QGP initiated several implementation projects in various clinical settings. These projects aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of PGx testing, gather valuable insights into the effective dissemination of PGx data to healthcare professionals and patients, and identify the gaps and the challenges for wider adoption. QPGx-CARES strategy aimed to integrate evidence-based PGx findings into clinical practice, focusing on implementing PGx testing for cardiovascular medications, supported by robust scientific evidence. The current initiative sets a precedent for the nationwide implementation of precision medicine across diverse clinical domains.

Electroanalysis in Pharmacogenomic Studies: Mechanisms of Drug Interaction with DNA.

The review discusses electrochemical methods for analysis of drug interactions with DNA. The electroanalysis method is based on the registration of interaction-induced changes in the electrochemical oxidation potential of heterocyclic nitrogenous bases in the DNA molecule and in the maximum oxidation current amplitude. The mechanisms of DNA-drug interactions can be identified based on the shift in the electrooxidation potential of heterocyclic nitrogenous bases toward more negative (cathodic) or positive (anodic) values. Drug intercalation into DNA shifts the electrochemical oxidation potential to positive values, indicating thermodynamically unfavorable process that hinders oxidation of nitrogenous bases in DNA. The potential shift toward the negative values indicates electrostatic interactions, e.g., drug binding in the DNA minor groove, since this process does not interfere with the electrochemical oxidation of bases. The concentration-dependent decrease in the intensity of electrochemical oxidation of DNA bases allows to quantify the type of interaction and calculate the binding constants.

Pharmacogenetic intervention improves treatment outcomes in Chinese adult men with schizophrenia.

To investigate the clinical application value of pharmacogenetic testing in individualized drug therapy for adult male patients with schizophrenia. A total of 186 adult patients with schizophrenia were enrolled and randomised into the pharmacogenetic (PGx) intervention group and the standard care group. In the PGx intervention group, PGx testing was performed, and the medication regimen was adjusted according to the results of the pharmacogenomic analysis. In contrast, in the standard care group, patients were treated according to the physician's medication experience. Differences in the primary indicator of schizophrenia, the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS), and the secondary efficacy measures, the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-SI) and Clinical Global Impressions-Global Improvement (CGI-GI) scale, were compared between the intervention and standard care groups. At baseline, the PGx intervention group consisted of 109 individuals, while the standard care group had 77 participants. After 12 weeks of treatment, 49 individuals withdrew from the PGx group (a dropout rate of 45.0%), and 34 withdrew from the standard care group (a dropout rate of 44.2%), with no significant difference in dropout rates between the two groups. The PANSS score reduction rate in the PGx intervention group significantly exceeded that of the standard care group during weeks 3, 6, and 12 of follow-up (P < 0.05). At the 12th week, the PGx intervention group achieved a treatment response rate of 81.7%, significantly surpassing the 48.8% of the standard care group (odds ratio of 4.67, 95% confidence interval of 1.96-11.41; P = 0.001). Furthermore, the PGx intervention was significantly more effective than standard care regardless of whether the patient had a first episode or a relapse (P < 0.05). Furthermore, the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scores and the Personal and Social Performance Scale (PSP) score changes in the PGx intervention group were both significantly different from those in the standard care group (P < 0.05). It is noteworthy that the PGx intervention similarly improves the prognostic outcomes for patients with and without a family history of mental disorders. In conclusion, the application of a PGx intervention treatment model based on PGx testing can significantly improve medication efficacy and shorten the time to achieve the effects of medication in schizophrenia.

Pharmacogenetic guided versus standard warfarin dosing for routine clinical care with its pharmacoeconomic impact: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Empirical use of pharmacogenetic test(PGT) is advocated for many drugs, and resource-rich setting hospitals are using the same commonly. The clinical translation of pharmacogenetic tests in terms of cost and clinical utility is yet to be examined in hospitals of low middle income countries (LMICs). AIM: The present study assessed the clinical utility of PGT by comparing the pharmacogenetically(PGT) guided- versus standard of care(SOC)- warfarin therapy, including the health economics of the two warfarin therapies. METHODS: An open-label, randomized, controlled clinical trial recruited warfarin-receiving patients in pharmacogenetically(PGT) guided- versus standard of care(SOC)- study arms. Pharmacogenetic analysis of CYP2C9*2(rs1799853), CYP2C9*3(rs1057910) and VKORC1(rs9923231) was performed for patients recruited to the PGT-guided arm. PT(Prothrombin Time)-INR(international normalized ratio) testing and dose titrations were allowed as per routine clinical practice. The primary endpoint was the percent time spent in the therapeutic INR range(TTR) during the 90-day observation period. Secondary endpoints were time to reach therapeutic INR(TRT), the proportion of adverse events, and economic comparison between two modes of therapy in a Markov model built for the commonest warfarin indication- atrial fibrillation. RESULTS: The study enrolled 168 patients, 84 in each arm. Per-protocol analysis showed a significantly high median time spent in therapeutic INR in the genotype-guided arm(42.85%; CI 21.4-66.75) as compared to the SOC arm(8.8%; CI 0-27.2)(p < 0.00001). The TRT was less in the PG-guided warfarin dosing group than the standard-of-care dosing warfarin group (17.85 vs. 33.92 days) (p = 0.002). Bleeding and thromboembolic events were similar in the two study groups. Lifetime expenditure was ₹1,26,830 in the PGT arm compared to ₹1,17,907 in the SOC arm. The QALY gain did not differ in the two groups(3.9 vs. 3.65). Compared to SOC, the incremental cost-utility ratio was ₹35,962 per QALY gain with PGT test opting. In deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the base case results were found to be insensitive to the variation in model parameters. In the cost-effectiveness-acceptability curve analysis, a 90% probability of cost-effectiveness was reached at a willingness-to-pay(WTP) of ₹ 71,630 well below one time GDP threshold of WTP used. CONCLUSION: Clinical efficacy and the cost-effectiveness of the warfarin pharmacogenetic test suggest its routine use as a point of care investigation for patient care in LMICs.

A Nanopore Sequencing-based Pharmacogenomic Panel to Personalize Tuberculosis Drug Dosing.

Rationale: Standardized dosing of antitubercular drugs leads to variable plasma drug levels, which are associated with adverse drug reactions, delayed treatment response, and relapse. Mutations in genes affecting drug metabolism explain considerable interindividual pharmacokinetic variability; however, pharmacogenomic assays that predict metabolism of antitubercular drugs have been lacking. Objectives: We sought to develop a Nanopore sequencing panel and validate its performance in patients with active tuberculosis (TB) to personalize treatment dosing. Methods: We developed a Nanopore sequencing panel targeting 15 SNPs in five genes affecting the metabolism of antitubercular drugs. For validation, we sequenced DNA samples (n = 48) from the 1,000 Genomes Project and compared the variant calling accuracy with that of Illumina genome sequencing. We then sequenced DNA samples from patients with active TB (n = 100) from South Africa on a MinION Mk1C and evaluated the relationship between genotypes and pharmacokinetic parameters for isoniazid (INH) and rifampin (RIF). Measurements and Main Results: The pharmacogenomic panel achieved 100% concordance with Illumina sequencing in variant identification for the samples from the 1,000 Genomes Project. In the clinical cohort, coverage was more than 100× for 1,498 of 1,500 (99.8%) amplicons across the 100 samples. Thirty-three percent, 47%, and 20% of participants were identified as slow, intermediate, and rapid INH acetylators, respectively. INH clearance was 2.2 times higher among intermediate acetylators and 3.8 times higher among rapid acetylators, compared with slow acetylators (P < 0.0001). RIF clearance was 17.3% (2.50-29.9) lower in individuals with homozygous AADAC rs1803155 G→A substitutions (P = 0.0015). Conclusions: Targeted sequencing can enable the detection of polymorphisms that influence TB drug metabolism on a low-cost, portable instrument to personalize dosing for TB treatment or prevention.

Pharmacogenomic Clinical Support Tools for the Treatment of Depression.

OBJECTIVE: In this review, the authors update the 2018 position statement of the American Psychiatric Association Council of Research Workgroup on Biomarkers and Novel Treatments on pharmacogenomic (PGx) tools for treatment selection in depression. METHODS: The literature was reviewed for new clinical trials and meta-analyses, published from 2017 to 2022, of studies using PGx tools for treatment selection in depression. The blinding and control conditions, as well as primary and secondary outcomes and post hoc analyses, were summarized. RESULTS: Eleven new clinical trials and five meta-analyses were identified; all studies had primary outcome measures related to speed or efficacy of treatment response. Three trials (27%) demonstrated efficacy on the primary outcome measure with statistical significance; the three studies used different PGx tools; one study was open-label and the other two were small single-blind trials. Five trials (45%) did not detect efficacy with statistical significance on either primary or secondary outcome measures. Only one trial (9%) used adverse events as a primary outcome measure. All studies had significant limitations; for example, none adopted a fully blinded study design, only two studies attempted to blind the treating clinician, and none incorporated measures to estimate the effectiveness of the blinds or the influence of lack of blinding on the study results. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of these new data do not alter the recommendations of the 2018 report, or the advice of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, that the evidence does not support the use of currently available combinatorial PGx tools for treatment selection in major depressive disorder. Priority efforts for future studies and the development and testing of effective tools include fully blinded study designs, inclusion of promising genetic variants not currently included in any commercially available tests, and investigation of other uses of pharmacogenomics, such as estimating the likelihood of rare adverse drug effects, rather than increasing the speed or magnitude of drug response.

Public preferences for pharmacogenetic testing in the NHS: Embedding a discrete choice experiment within service design to better meet user needs.

AIMS: Genetic testing can be used to improve the safety and effectiveness of commonly prescribed medicines-a concept known as pharmacogenetics. This study aimed to quantify members of the UK public's preferences for a pharmacogenetic service to be delivered in primary care in the National Health Service. METHODS: Members of the UK population were surveyed via an online panel company. Respondents completed 1 of 2 survey versions, asking respondents to select their preferred pharmacogenetic testing service in the context of a presentation of low mood or pain. A conditional logit model was estimated, before the best functional form for the dataset was identified. Preference heterogeneity was identified via latent class analysis. Coefficients from the final selected models were used to estimate uptake in the context of different hypothetical pharmacogenetic services. RESULTS: Responses from 1993 individuals were included in the analysis. There were no differences observed in preference between the 2 clinical scenarios. Conditional logit analysis, using maximum likelihood estimation, indicated that respondents preferred to have noninvasive tests and wanted their data to be shared between different healthcare organizations to guide future prescribing. There was a preference for regional over national data sharing initiatives, and respondents preferred to have access to their data. Predicted uptake varied considerably, ranging from 51% to >99%, depending on design of the service. CONCLUSION: This study identifies public preferences for a pharmacogenetic testing service and demonstrates how predicted uptake can be impacted by relatively minor adaptations. This highlights areas for prioritization during development of future pharmacogenetic services.