Personal omics profiling reveals dynamic molecular and medical phenotypes.

Personalized medicine is expected to benefit from combining genomic information with regular monitoring of physiological states by multiple high-throughput methods. Here, we present an integrative personal omics profile (iPOP), an analysis that combines genomic, transcriptomic, proteomic, metabolomic, and autoantibody profiles from a single individual over a 14 month period. Our iPOP analysis revealed various medical risks, including type 2 diabetes. It also uncovered extensive, dynamic changes in diverse molecular components and biological pathways across healthy and diseased conditions. Extremely high-coverage genomic and transcriptomic data, which provide the basis of our iPOP, revealed extensive heteroallelic changes during healthy and diseased states and an unexpected RNA editing mechanism. This study demonstrates that longitudinal iPOP can be used to interpret healthy and diseased states by connecting genomic information with additional dynamic omics activity.

Frequencies of pharmacogenomic alleles across biogeographic groups in a large-scale biobank.

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) is an integral part of precision medicine and contributes to the maximization of drug efficacy and reduction of adverse drug event risk. Accurate information on PGx allele frequencies improves the implementation of PGx. Nonetheless, curating such information from published allele data is time and resource intensive. The limited number of allelic variants in most studies leads to an underestimation of certain alleles. We applied the Pharmacogenomics Clinical Annotation Tool (PharmCAT) on an integrated 200K UK Biobank genetic dataset (N = 200,044). Based on PharmCAT results, we estimated PGx frequencies (alleles, diplotypes, phenotypes, and activity scores) for 17 pharmacogenes in five biogeographic groups: European, Central/South Asian, East Asian, Afro-Caribbean, and Sub-Saharan African. PGx frequencies were distinct for each biogeographic group. Even biogeographic groups with similar proportions of phenotypes were driven by different sets of dominant PGx alleles. PharmCAT also identified "no-function" alleles that were rare or seldom tested in certain groups by previous studies, e.g., SLCO1B1∗31 in the Afro-Caribbean (3.0%) and Sub-Saharan African (3.9%) groups. Estimated PGx frequencies are disseminated via the PharmGKB (The Pharmacogenomics Knowledgebase: www.pharmgkb.org). We demonstrate that genetic biobanks such as the UK Biobank are a robust resource for estimating PGx frequencies. Improving our understanding of PGx allele and phenotype frequencies provides guidance for future PGx studies and clinical genetic test panel design, and better serves individuals from wider biogeographic backgrounds.

Evaluating the frequency and the impact of pharmacogenetic alleles in an ancestrally diverse Biobank population.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacogenomics (PGx) aims to utilize a patient's genetic data to enable safer and more effective prescribing of medications. The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) provides guidelines with strong evidence for 24 genes that affect 72 medications. Despite strong evidence linking PGx alleles to drug response, there is a large gap in the implementation and return of actionable pharmacogenetic findings to patients in standard clinical practice. In this study, we evaluated opportunities for genetically guided medication prescribing in a diverse health system and determined the frequencies of actionable PGx alleles in an ancestrally diverse biobank population. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the Penn Medicine electronic health records (EHRs), which includes ~ 3.3 million patients between 2012 and 2020, provides a snapshot of the trends in prescriptions for drugs with genotype-based prescribing guidelines ('CPIC level A or B') in the Penn Medicine health system. The Penn Medicine BioBank (PMBB) consists of a diverse group of 43,359 participants whose EHRs are linked to genome-wide SNP array and whole exome sequencing (WES) data. We used the Pharmacogenomics Clinical Annotation Tool (PharmCAT), to annotate PGx alleles from PMBB variant call format (VCF) files and identify samples with actionable PGx alleles. RESULTS: We identified ~ 316.000 unique patients that were prescribed at least 2 drugs with CPIC Level A or B guidelines. Genetic analysis in PMBB identified that 98.9% of participants carry one or more PGx actionable alleles where treatment modification would be recommended. After linking the genetic data with prescription data from the EHR, 14.2% of participants (n = 6157) were prescribed medications that could be impacted by their genotype (as indicated by their PharmCAT report). For example, 856 participants received clopidogrel who carried CYP2C19 reduced function alleles, placing them at increased risk for major adverse cardiovascular events. When we stratified by genetic ancestry, we found disparities in PGx allele frequencies and clinical burden. Clopidogrel users of Asian ancestry in PMBB had significantly higher rates of CYP2C19 actionable alleles than European ancestry users of clopidrogrel (p < 0.0001, OR = 3.68). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically actionable PGx alleles are highly prevalent in our health system and many patients were prescribed medications that could be affected by PGx alleles. These results illustrate the potential utility of preemptive genotyping for tailoring of medications and implementation of PGx into routine clinical care.

Clinical pharmacogenomic testing and reporting: A technical standard of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG).

Pharmacogenomic testing interrogates germline sequence variants implicated in interindividual drug response variability to infer a drug response phenotype and to guide medication management for certain drugs. Specifically, discrete aspects of pharmacokinetics, such as drug metabolism, and pharmacodynamics, as well as drug sensitivity, can be predicted by genes that code for proteins involved in these pathways. Pharmacogenomics is unique and differs from inherited disease genetics because the drug response phenotype can be drug-dependent and is often unrecognized until an unexpected drug reaction occurs or a patient fails to respond to a medication. Genes and variants with sufficiently high levels of evidence and consensus may be included in a clinical pharmacogenomic test; however, result interpretation and phenotype prediction can be challenging for some genes and medications. This document provides a resource for laboratories to develop and implement clinical pharmacogenomic testing by summarizing publicly available resources and detailing best practices for pharmacogenomic nomenclature, testing, result interpretation, and reporting.

Verifying nomenclature of DNA variants in submitted manuscripts: Guidance for journals.

Documenting variation in our genomes is important for research and clinical care. Accuracy in the description of DNA variants is therefore essential. To address this issue, the Human Variome Project convened a committee to evaluate the feasibility of requiring authors to verify that all variants submitted for publication complied with a widely accepted standard for description. After a pilot study of two journals, the committee agreed that requiring authors to verify that variants complied with Human Genome Variation Society nomenclature is a reasonable step toward standardizing the worldwide inventory of human variation.

Review and Consensus on Pharmacogenomic Testing in Psychiatry.

The implementation of pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing in psychiatry remains modest, in part due to divergent perceptions of the quality and completeness of the evidence base and diverse perspectives on the clinical utility of PGx testing among psychiatrists and other healthcare providers. Recognizing the current lack of consensus within the field, the International Society of Psychiatric Genetics assembled a group of experts to conduct a narrative synthesis of the PGx literature, prescribing guidelines, and product labels related to psychotropic medications as well as the key considerations and limitations related to the use of PGx testing in psychiatry. The group concluded that to inform medication selection and dosing of several commonly-used antidepressant and antipsychotic medications, current published evidence, prescribing guidelines, and product labels support the use of PGx testing for 2 cytochrome P450 genes (CYP2D6, CYP2C19). In addition, the evidence supports testing for human leukocyte antigen genes when using the mood stabilizers carbamazepine (HLA-A and HLA-B), oxcarbazepine (HLA-B), and phenytoin (CYP2C9, HLA-B). For valproate, screening for variants in certain genes (POLG, OTC, CSP1) is recommended when a mitochondrial disorder or a urea cycle disorder is suspected. Although barriers to implementing PGx testing remain to be fully resolved, the current trajectory of discovery and innovation in the field suggests these barriers will be overcome and testing will become an important tool in psychiatry.

Pharmacogenomics and big genomic data: from lab to clinic and back again.

The field of pharmacogenomics is an area of great potential for near-term human health impacts from the big genomic data revolution. Pharmacogenomics research momentum is building with numerous hypotheses currently being investigated through the integration of molecular profiles of different cell lines and large genomic data sets containing information on cellular and human responses to therapies. Additionally, the results of previous pharmacogenetic research efforts have been formulated into clinical guidelines that are beginning to impact how healthcare is conducted on the level of the individual patient. This trend will only continue with the recent release of new datasets containing linked genotype and electronic medical record data. This review discusses key resources available for pharmacogenomics and pharmacogenetics research and highlights recent work within the field.

The association of obesity and coronary artery disease genes with response to SSRIs treatment in major depression.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are first-line antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). However, treatment response during an initial therapeutic trial is often poor and is difficult to predict. Heterogeneity of response to SSRIs in depressed patients is partly driven by co-occurring somatic disorders such as coronary artery disease (CAD) and obesity. CAD and obesity may also be associated with metabolic side effects of SSRIs. In this study, we assessed the association of CAD and obesity with treatment response to SSRIs in patients with MDD using a polygenic score (PGS) approach. Additionally, we performed cross-trait meta-analyses to pinpoint genetic variants underpinnings the relationship of CAD and obesity with SSRIs treatment response. First, PGSs were calculated at different p value thresholds (PT) for obesity and CAD. Next, binary logistic regression was applied to evaluate the association of the PGSs to SSRIs treatment response in a discovery sample (ISPC, N = 865), and in a replication cohort (STAR*D, N = 1,878). Finally, a cross-trait GWAS meta-analysis was performed by combining summary statistics. We show that the PGSs for CAD and obesity were inversely associated with SSRIs treatment response. At the most significant thresholds, the PGS for CAD and body mass index accounted 1.3%, and 0.8% of the observed variability in treatment response to SSRIs, respectively. In the cross-trait meta-analyses, we identified (1) 14 genetic loci (including NEGR1, CADM2, PMAIP1, PARK2) that are associated with both obesity and SSRIs treatment response; (2) five genetic loci (LINC01412, PHACTR1, CDKN2B, ATXN2, KCNE2) with effects on CAD and SSRIs treatment response. Our findings implicate that the genetic variants of CAD and obesity are linked to SSRIs treatment response in MDD. A better SSRIs treatment response might be achieved through a stratified allocation of treatment for MDD patients with a genetic risk for obesity or CAD.

Preemptive clinical pharmacogenetics implementation: current programs in five US medical centers.

Although the field of pharmacogenetics has existed for decades, practioners have been slow to implement pharmacogenetic testing in clinical care. Numerous publications describe the barriers to clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics. Recently, several freely available resources have been developed to help address these barriers. In this review, we discuss current programs that use preemptive genotyping to optimize the pharmacotherapy of patients. Array-based preemptive testing includes a large number of relevant pharmacogenes that impact multiple high-risk drugs. Using a preemptive approach allows genotyping results to be available prior to any prescribing decision so that genomic variation may be considered as an inherent patient characteristic in the planning of therapy. This review describes the common elements among programs that have implemented preemptive genotyping and highlights key processes for implementation, including clinical decision support.

Genome-wide and candidate gene approaches of clopidogrel efficacy using pharmacodynamic and clinical end points-Rationale and design of the International Clopidogrel Pharmacogenomics Consortium (ICPC).

RATIONALE: The P2Y12 receptor inhibitor clopidogrel is widely used in patients with acute coronary syndrome, percutaneous coronary intervention, or ischemic stroke. Platelet inhibition by clopidogrel shows wide interpatient variability, and high on-treatment platelet reactivity is a risk factor for atherothrombotic events, particularly in high-risk populations. CYP2C19 polymorphism plays an important role in this variability, but heritability estimates suggest that additional genetic variants remain unidentified. The aim of the International Clopidogrel Pharmacogenomics Consortium (ICPC) is to identify genetic determinants of clopidogrel pharmacodynamics and clinical response. STUDY DESIGN: Based on the data published on www.clinicaltrials.gov, clopidogrel intervention studies containing genetic and platelet function data were identified for participation. Lead investigators were invited to share DNA samples, platelet function test results, patient characteristics, and cardiovascular outcomes to perform candidate gene and genome-wide studies. RESULTS: In total, 17 study sites from 13 countries participate in the ICPC, contributing individual patient data from 8,829 patients. Available adenosine diphosphate-stimulated platelet function tests included vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein assay, light transmittance aggregometry, and the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. A proof-of-principle analysis based on genotype data provided by each group showed a strong and consistent association between CYP2C19*2 and platelet reactivity (P value=5.1 × 10-40). CONCLUSION: The ICPC aims to identify new loci influencing clopidogrel efficacy by using state-of-the-art genetic approaches in a large cohort of clopidogrel-treated patients to better understand the genetic basis of on-treatment response variability.

Sequence to Medical Phenotypes: A Framework for Interpretation of Human Whole Genome DNA Sequence Data.

High throughput sequencing has facilitated a precipitous drop in the cost of genomic sequencing, prompting predictions of a revolution in medicine via genetic personalization of diagnostic and therapeutic strategies. There are significant barriers to realizing this goal that are related to the difficult task of interpreting personal genetic variation. A comprehensive, widely accessible application for interpretation of whole genome sequence data is needed. Here, we present a series of methods for identification of genetic variants and genotypes with clinical associations, phasing genetic data and using Mendelian inheritance for quality control, and providing predictive genetic information about risk for rare disease phenotypes and response to pharmacological therapy in single individuals and father-mother-child trios. We demonstrate application of these methods for disease and drug response prognostication in whole genome sequence data from twelve unrelated adults, and for disease gene discovery in one father-mother-child trio with apparently simplex congenital ventricular arrhythmia. In doing so we identify clinically actionable inherited disease risk and drug response genotypes in pre-symptomatic individuals. We also nominate a new candidate gene in congenital arrhythmia, ATP2B4, and provide experimental evidence of a regulatory role for variants discovered using this framework.

Working toward precision medicine: Predicting phenotypes from exomes in the Critical Assessment of Genome Interpretation (CAGI) challenges.

Precision medicine aims to predict a patient's disease risk and best therapeutic options by using that individual's genetic sequencing data. The Critical Assessment of Genome Interpretation (CAGI) is a community experiment consisting of genotype-phenotype prediction challenges; participants build models, undergo assessment, and share key findings. For CAGI 4, three challenges involved using exome-sequencing data: Crohn's disease, bipolar disorder, and warfarin dosing. Previous CAGI challenges included prior versions of the Crohn's disease challenge. Here, we discuss the range of techniques used for phenotype prediction as well as the methods used for assessing predictive models. Additionally, we outline some of the difficulties associated with making predictions and evaluating them. The lessons learned from the exome challenges can be applied to both research and clinical efforts to improve phenotype prediction from genotype. In addition, these challenges serve as a vehicle for sharing clinical and research exome data in a secure manner with scientists who have a broad range of expertise, contributing to a collaborative effort to advance our understanding of genotype-phenotype relationships.

Standardizing terms for clinical pharmacogenetic test results: consensus terms from the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC).

INTRODUCTION: Reporting and sharing pharmacogenetic test results across clinical laboratories and electronic health records is a crucial step toward the implementation of clinical pharmacogenetics, but allele function and phenotype terms are not standardized. Our goal was to develop terms that can be broadly applied to characterize pharmacogenetic allele function and inferred phenotypes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Terms currently used by genetic testing laboratories and in the literature were identified. The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) used the Delphi method to obtain a consensus and agree on uniform terms among pharmacogenetic experts. RESULTS: Experts with diverse involvement in at least one area of pharmacogenetics (clinicians, researchers, genetic testing laboratorians, pharmacogenetics implementers, and clinical informaticians; n = 58) participated. After completion of five surveys, a consensus (>70%) was reached with 90% of experts agreeing to the final sets of pharmacogenetic terms. DISCUSSION: The proposed standardized pharmacogenetic terms will improve the understanding and interpretation of pharmacogenetic tests and reduce confusion by maintaining consistent nomenclature. These standard terms can also facilitate pharmacogenetic data sharing across diverse electronic health care record systems with clinical decision support.Genet Med 19 2, 215-223.

Recommendations for reporting of secondary findings in clinical exome and genome sequencing, 2016 update (ACMG SF v2.0): a policy statement of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics.

Disclaimer: These recommendations are designed primarily as an educational resource for medical geneticists and other healthcare providers to help them provide quality medical services. Adherence to these recommendations is completely voluntary and does not necessarily assure a successful medical outcome. These recommendations should not be considered inclusive of all proper procedures and tests or exclusive of other procedures and tests that are reasonably directed toward obtaining the same results. In determining the propriety of any specific procedure or test, the clinician should apply his or her own professional judgment to the specific clinical circumstances presented by the individual patient or specimen. Clinicians are encouraged to document the reasons for the use of a particular procedure or test, whether or not it is in conformance with this statement. Clinicians also are advised to take notice of the date this statement was adopted and to consider other medical and scientific information that becomes available after that date. It also would be prudent to consider whether intellectual property interests may restrict the performance of certain tests and other procedures.To promote standardized reporting of actionable information from clinical genomic sequencing, in 2013, the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) published a minimum list of genes to be reported as incidental or secondary findings. The goal was to identify and manage risks for selected highly penetrant genetic disorders through established interventions aimed at preventing or significantly reducing morbidity and mortality. The ACMG subsequently established the Secondary Findings Maintenance Working Group to develop a process for curating and updating the list over time. We describe here the new process for accepting and evaluating nominations for updates to the secondary findings list. We also report outcomes from six nominations received in the initial 15 months after the process was implemented. Applying the new process while upholding the core principles of the original policy statement resulted in the addition of four genes and removal of one gene; one gene did not meet criteria for inclusion. The updated secondary findings minimum list includes 59 medically actionable genes recommended for return in clinical genomic sequencing. We discuss future areas of focus, encourage continued input from the medical community, and call for research on the impact of returning genomic secondary findings.Genet Med 19 2, 249-255.