A 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel to prevent adverse drug reactions: an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised crossover implementation study.

BACKGROUND: The benefit of pharmacogenetic testing before starting drug therapy has been well documented for several single gene-drug combinations. However, the clinical utility of a pre-emptive genotyping strategy using a pharmacogenetic panel has not been rigorously assessed. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised, crossover implementation study of a 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel in 18 hospitals, nine community health centres, and 28 community pharmacies in seven European countries (Austria, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, and the UK). Patients aged 18 years or older receiving a first prescription for a drug clinically recommended in the guidelines of the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (ie, the index drug) as part of routine care were eligible for inclusion. Exclusion criteria included previous genetic testing for a gene relevant to the index drug, a planned duration of treatment of less than 7 consecutive days, and severe renal or liver insufficiency. All patients gave written informed consent before taking part in the study. Participants were genotyped for 50 germline variants in 12 genes, and those with an actionable variant (ie, a drug-gene interaction test result for which the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group [DPWG] recommended a change to standard-of-care drug treatment) were treated according to DPWG recommendations. Patients in the control group received standard treatment. To prepare clinicians for pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing, local teams were educated during a site-initiation visit and online educational material was made available. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions within the 12-week follow-up period. Analyses were irrespective of patient adherence to the DPWG guidelines. The primary analysis was done using a gatekeeping analysis, in which outcomes in people with an actionable drug-gene interaction in the study group versus the control group were compared, and only if the difference was statistically significant was an analysis done that included all of the patients in the study. Outcomes were compared between the study and control groups, both for patients with an actionable drug-gene interaction test result (ie, a result for which the DPWG recommended a change to standard-of-care drug treatment) and for all patients who received at least one dose of index drug. The safety analysis included all participants who received at least one dose of a study drug. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03093818 and is closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between March 7, 2017, and June 30, 2020, 41 696 patients were assessed for eligibility and 6944 (51·4 % female, 48·6% male; 97·7% self-reported European, Mediterranean, or Middle Eastern ethnicity) were enrolled and assigned to receive genotype-guided drug treatment (n=3342) or standard care (n=3602). 99 patients (52 [1·6%] of the study group and 47 [1·3%] of the control group) withdrew consent after group assignment. 652 participants (367 [11·0%] in the study group and 285 [7·9%] in the control group) were lost to follow-up. In patients with an actionable test result for the index drug (n=1558), a clinically relevant adverse drug reaction occurred in 152 (21·0%) of 725 patients in the study group and 231 (27·7%) of 833 patients in the control group (odds ratio [OR] 0·70 [95% CI 0·54-0·91]; p=0·0075), whereas for all patients, the incidence was 628 (21·5%) of 2923 patients in the study group and 934 (28·6%) of 3270 patients in the control group (OR 0·70 [95% CI 0·61-0·79]; p <0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Genotype-guided treatment using a 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel significantly reduced the incidence of clinically relevant adverse drug reactions and was feasible across diverse European health-care system organisations and settings. Large-scale implementation could help to make drug therapy increasingly safe. FUNDING: European Union Horizon 2020.

Economic evaluation of pharmacogenomic-guided antiplatelet treatment in Spanish patients suffering from acute coronary syndrome participating in the U-PGx PREPARE study.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular diseases and especially Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) constitute a major health issue impacting millions of patients worldwide. Being a leading cause of death and hospital admissions in many European countries including Spain, it accounts for enormous amounts of healthcare expenditures for its management. Clopidogrel is one of the oldest antiplatelet medications used as standard of care in ACS. METHODS: In this study, we performed an economic evaluation study to estimate whether a genome-guided clopidogrel treatment is cost-effective compared to conventional one in a large cohort of 243 individuals of Spanish origin suffering from ACS and treated with clopidogrel. Data were derived from the U-PGx PREPARE clinical trial. Effectiveness was measured as survival of individuals while study data on safety and efficacy, as well as on resource utilization associated with each adverse drug reaction were used to measure costs to treat these adverse drug reactions. A generalized linear regression model was used to estimate cost differences for both study groups. RESULTS: Based on our findings, PGx-guided treatment group is cost-effective. PGx-guided treatment demonstrated to have 50% less hospital admissions, reduced emergency visits and almost 13% less ADRs compared to the non-PGx approach with mean QALY 1.07 (95% CI, 1.04-1.10) versus 1.06 (95% CI, 1.03-1.09) for the control group, while life years for both groups were 1.24 (95% CI, 1.20-1.26) and 1.23 (95% CI, 1.19-1.26), respectively. The mean total cost of PGx-guided treatment was 50% less expensive than conventional therapy with clopidogrel [€883 (95% UI, €316-€1582), compared to €1,755 (95% UI, €765-€2949)]. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that PGx-guided clopidogrel treatment represents a cost-effective option for patients suffering from ACS in the Spanish healthcare setting.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomics-guided clopidogrel treatment in Spanish patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention.

Clopidogrel is an antiplatelet drug given to patients before and after having a percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Genomic variants in the CYP2C19 gene are associated with variable enzyme activities affecting drug metabolism and hence, patients with reduced or increased enzymatic function have increased risk of bleeding. We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to compare a pharmacogenomics versus a non-pharmacogenomics-guided clopidogrel treatment for coronary artery syndrome patients undergoing PCI in the Spanish healthcare setting. A total of 549 patients diagnosed with coronary artery disease followed by PCI were recruited. Dual antiplatelet therapy was administrated to all patients from 1 to 12 months after PCI. Patients were classified into two groups: the Retrospective group was treated with clopidogrel based on the clinical routine practice and the Prospective group were initially genotyped for the presence of CYP2C19 variant alleles before treatment with those carrying more than one CYP2C19 variant alleles given prasugrel treatment. We collected data on established clinical and health outcome measures, including, per treatment arm: the percentage of patients that suffered from (a) myocardial infraction, (b) major bleeding and minor bleeding, (c) stroke, (d) the number of hospitalization days, and (e) the number of days patients spent in Intensive Care Unit. Our primary outcome measure for the cost-effectiveness analysis was Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALYs). To estimate the treatment cost for each patient, individual data on its resource used were combined with unit price data, obtained from Spanish national sources. The analysis predicts a survival of 0.9446 QALYs in the pharmacogenomics arm and 0.9379 QALYs in the non-pharmacogenomics arm within a 1-year horizon. The cumulative costs per patient were €2971 and €3205 for the Prospective and Retrospective groups, respectively. The main cost driver of total cost in both arms was hospitalization costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was negative indicating that the PGx was a dominant option. Our data show that pharmacogenomics-guided clopidogrel treatment strategy may represent a cost-effective choice compared with non-pharmacogenomics-guided strategy for patients undergoing PCI.

Influence of the HER2 Ile655Val polymorphism on trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity in HER2-positive breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The HER2 655 A>G genetic variant has recently been associated with trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity in HER2 breast cancer patients. Considering previous results, the aim of our study was to validate the role of this polymorphism as a predictor of the cardiac toxicity of trastuzumab in breast cancer patients. METHODS: Our study population was composed of 78 HER2 breast cancer patients receiving trastuzumab. The HER2 655 A>G (rs1136201) genetic variant was genotyped using TaqMan allelic discrimination technology. Patients were classified on the basis of the occurrence of cardiotoxic events or the absence of cardiotoxic events during 1 year after the first infusion. RESULTS: The HER2 655 A>G polymorphism was significantly associated with cardiotoxicity: AG versus AA [P=0.012, odds ratio (OR)=5.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.43-18.36], AG+GG versus AA (P=0.01, OR=5.72, 95% CI 1.50-21.76), AG versus AA+GG (P=0.005, OR=7.17, 95% CI 1.82-28.29). A meta-analysis combining these data with the results from previous studies confirmed this association. CONCLUSION: Our results support the role of the HER2 655 A>G polymorphism as a genetic marker of trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity in HER2-positive breast cancer patients.

Confirmation of -174G/C interleukin-6 gene promoter polymorphism as a genetic marker predicting antitumor necrosis factor treatment outcome.

BACKGROUND: The IL-6 -174G/C genetic variant has recently been associated with the clinical response to etanercept therapy in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. Considering previous results, the aim of our study was to validate the role of this polymorphism as a predictor of the antitumor necrosis factor (anti-TNF) treatment outcome in RA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our study population was composed of 199 Spanish patients with RA receiving anti-TNF therapy. The IL-6 -174G/C (rs1800795) genetic variant was genotyped using the TaqMan allelic discrimination technology. Patients were classified, according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria, as responders (good and moderate response) and nonresponders at 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after the first infusion. RESULTS: The -174*G allele was significantly associated with a good or moderate EULAR response at 12 [P=0.015, odds ratio (OR)=2.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.29-6.70], 18 (P=4.54E-03, OR=5.17, 95% CI 1.80-14.85), and 24 months (P=4.54E-03, OR=14.86, 95% CI 2.91-75.91). A meta-analysis combining these data with the results from a previous study confirmed this association (P=1.89E-02, OR=1.80, 95% CI 1.13-2.87, at 12 months). CONCLUSION: Our results support the role of the -174G/C IL-6 polymorphism as a genetic marker of responsiveness to anti-TNF therapy.

Lack of validation of genetic variants associated with anti-tumor necrosis factor therapy response in rheumatoid arthritis: a genome-wide association study replication and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, our aim was to elucidate the role of four polymorphisms identified in a prior large genome-wide association study (GWAS) in which the investigators analyzed the responses of patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) to treatment with tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFi). The authors of that study reported that the four genetic variants were significantly associated. However, none of the associations reached GWAS significance, and two subsequent studies failed to replicate these associations. METHODS: The four polymorphisms (rs12081765, rs1532269, rs17301249 and rs7305646) were genotyped in a total of 634 TNFi-treated RA patients of Spanish Caucasian origin. Four outcomes were evaluated: changes in the Disease Activity Score in 28 joints (DAS28) after 6 and 12 months of treatment and classification according to the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) response criteria at the same time points. Association with DAS28 changes was assessed by linear regression using an additive genetic model. Contingency tables of genotype and allele frequencies between EULAR responder and nonresponder patients were compared. In addition, we combined our data with those of previously reported studies in a meta-analysis including 2,998 RA patients. RESULTS: None of the four genetic variants showed an association with response to TNFi in any of the four outcomes analyzed in our Spanish patients. In addition, only rs1532269 yielded a suggestive association (P = 0.0033) with the response to TNFi when available data from previous studies were combined in the meta-analysis. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that the rs12081765, rs1532269, rs17301249 and rs7305646 genetic variants do not have a role as genetic predictors of TNFi treatment outcomes.