Establishing clinical severity for PROMIS® measures in adult patients with rheumatic diseases.

PURPOSE: Different patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures are used for rheumatic diseases (RD). The aims of this study are-(1) Identify PROMIS® domains most relevant to care of patients with RD, (2) Collect T-Score metrics in patients with RD, and (3) Identify clinically meaningful cut-points for these domains. METHODS: A convenience sample of RD patients was recruited consecutively during clinic visits, and asked to complete computer-adaptive tests on thirteen Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) instruments. Based on discussion with clinical providers, four measures were chosen to be relevant and actionable (from rheumatologists' perspective) in RD patients. Data from RD patients were used to develop clinical vignettes across a range of symptom severity. Vignettes were created based on most likely item responses at different levels on the T-score metric (mean = 50; SD = 10) and anchored at 5-point intervals (0.5 SDs). Patients with RD (N = 9) and clinical providers (N = 10) participated as expert panelists in separate one-day meetings using a modified educational standard setting method. RESULTS: Four domains (physical function, pain interferences, sleep disturbance, depression) that are actionable at the point-of-care were selected. For all domains, patients endorsed cut-points at lower levels of impairment than providers by 0.5 to 1 SD (e.g., severe impairment in physical function was defined as a T-score of 35 by patients and 25 by providers). CONCLUSIONS: We used a modified educational method to estimate clinically relevant cut-points to classify severity for PROMIS measures This allows for meaningful interpretation of PROMIS® measures in a clinical setting of RD population.

Comprehensive analysis of CBFbeta-MYH11 fusion transcripts in acute myeloid leukemia by RT-PCR analysis.

CBFbeta-MYH11 fusion transcripts are expressed in acute myeloid leukemias of the M4Eo subtype. Patients who express CBFbeta-MYH11 fusion transcripts respond favorably to high-dose chemotherapy and are generally spared allogeneic bone marrow transplantation. Hence it is important to identify this fusion in all patients with acute myeloid leukemia M4Eo leukemia. The fusion can be detected by cytogenetics, fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH), or by molecular analysis with RT-PCR. Multiple fusion transcripts arising as a result of various breakpoints in the CBFbeta and MYH11 have been identified. In this report we describe a comprehensive RT-PCR assay to identify all known fusion transcripts and provide an algorithm for molecular analysis of CBFbeta-MYH11 fusions from patient specimens. Further, identification of the fusion transcript by such an assay would help in the diagnosis and follow up of patients with cryptic inversion 16 translocations (such as patient 2 in this report) not detected by standard cytogenetics or FISH and for rational design of probes for quantitative analysis by real-time PCR.

Feasibility of implementing a comprehensive warfarin pharmacogenetics service.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the procedural feasibility of a pharmacist-led interdisciplinary service for providing genotype-guided warfarin dosing for hospitalized patients newly starting warfarin. DESIGN: Prospective observational study. SETTING: A 438-bed tertiary care hospital affiliated with a large academic institution. PATIENTS: Eighty patients who started warfarin therapy and were managed by a newly implemented pharmacogenetics service. INTERVENTION: All patients received routine warfarin genotyping and clinical pharmacogenetics consultation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcomes were percentage of genotype-guided dose recommendations available prior to the second warfarin dose and adherence of the medical staff to doses recommended by the pharmacogenetics service. Of 436 genotype orders placed during the first 6 months of the service, 190 (44%) were deemed appropriate. For the 80 patients on the service who consented to data collection, 76% of the genotypes were available prior to the second warfarin dose. The median (range) time from genotype order to genotype result was 26 hours (7-80 hrs), and the time to genotype-guided dose recommendation was 30 hours (7-80 hrs). A total of 73% of warfarin doses ordered by the medical staff were within 0.5 mg of the daily dose recommended by the pharmacogenetics consult service. CONCLUSION: Providing routine genotype-guided warfarin dosing supported by a pharmacogenetics consult service is feasible from a procedural standpoint, with most genotypes available prior to the second warfarin dose and good adherence to genotype-guided dose recommendations by the medical staff.