Implementation of preemptive DNA sequence-based pharmacogenomics testing across a large academic medical center: The Mayo-Baylor RIGHT 10K Study.

PURPOSE: The Mayo-Baylor RIGHT 10K Study enabled preemptive, sequence-based pharmacogenomics (PGx)-driven drug prescribing practices in routine clinical care within a large cohort. We also generated the tools and resources necessary for clinical PGx implementation and identified challenges that need to be overcome. Furthermore, we measured the frequency of both common genetic variation for which clinical guidelines already exist and rare variation that could be detected by DNA sequencing, rather than genotyping. METHODS: Targeted oligonucleotide-capture sequencing of 77 pharmacogenes was performed using DNA from 10,077 consented Mayo Clinic Biobank volunteers. The resulting predicted drug response-related phenotypes for 13 genes, including CYP2D6 and HLA, affecting 21 drug-gene pairs, were deposited preemptively in the Mayo electronic health record. RESULTS: For the 13 pharmacogenes of interest, the genomes of 79% of participants carried clinically actionable variants in 3 or more genes, and DNA sequencing identified an average of 3.3 additional conservatively predicted deleterious variants that would not have been evident using genotyping. CONCLUSION: Implementation of preemptive rather than reactive and sequence-based rather than genotype-based PGx prescribing revealed nearly universal patient applicability and required integrated institution-wide resources to fully realize individualized drug therapy and to show more efficient use of health care resources.

Genetic variants related to successful migraine prophylaxis with verapamil.

BACKGROUND: Currently, there is no biologically based rationale for drug selection in migraine prophylactic treatment. METHODS: To investigate the genetic variation underlying treatment response to verapamil prophylaxis, we selected 225 patients from a longitudinally established, deeply phenotyped migraine database (N = 5983), and collected uninterrupted quantitated verapamil treatment response data and DNA for these 225 cases. We recorded the number of headache days in the four weeks preceding treatment with verapamil and for four weeks, following completion of a treatment period with verapamil lasting at least five weeks. Whole-exome sequencing (WES) was applied to a discovery cohort consisting of 21 definitive responders and 14 definitive non-responders, and the identified single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) showing significant association were genotyped in a separate confirmation cohort (185 verapamil treated patients). Statistical analysis of the WES data from the discovery cohort identified 524 SNPs associated with verapamil responsiveness (p < 0.01); among them, 39 SNPs were validated in the confirmatory cohort (n = 185) which included the full range of response to verapamil from highly responsive to not responsive. RESULTS: Fourteen SNPs were confirmed by both percentage and arithmetic statistical approaches. Pathway and protein network analysis implicated myo-inositol biosynthetic and phospholipase-C second messenger pathways in verapamil responsiveness, emphasizing the earlier pathogenic understanding of migraine. No association was found between genetic variation in verapamil metabolic enzymes and treatment response. CONCLUSION: Our findings demonstrate that genetic analysis in well-characterized subpopulations can yield important pharmacogenetic information pertaining to the mechanism of anti-migraine prophylactic medications.

Comparison of three methods for genotyping the UGT1A1 (TA)n repeat polymorphism.

OBJECTIVES: The UGT1A1 promoter contains a (TA)n repeat polymorphism. The 7 repeat allele is associated with decreased enzyme activity and patients homozygous for this allele treated with irinotecan may experience life-threatening toxicity. Here, we have compared three methods [DNA sequencing, fragment analysis, and the Invader assay (Third Wave Technologies)] for genotyping this polymorphism. RESULTS: All of the DNA samples (n=119) had concordant genotype calls between the sequencing and size-based methods. The Invader method was also concordant if the genotypes were 6/6, 6/7, or 7/7. Both the size-based method and the Invader method had straightforward data analysis, while interpretation of the sequencing results was occasionally more challenging. The Invader method required more concentrated DNA for analysis, was more expensive, and had a limited genotyping spectrum. CONCLUSION: All three methods were valuable for genotyping the UGT1A1 (TA)n repeat, with the sequencing and size-based assays having the fewest drawbacks.

Preemptive Pharmacogenomic Testing for Precision Medicine: A Comprehensive Analysis of Five Actionable Pharmacogenomic Genes Using Next-Generation DNA Sequencing and a Customized CYP2D6 Genotyping Cascade.

Significant barriers, such as lack of professional guidelines, specialized training for interpretation of pharmacogenomics (PGx) data, and insufficient evidence to support clinical utility, prevent preemptive PGx testing from being widely clinically implemented. The current study, as a pilot project for the Right Drug, Right Dose, Right Time-Using Genomic Data to Individualize Treatment Protocol, was designed to evaluate the impact of preemptive PGx and to optimize the workflow in the clinic setting. We used an 84-gene next-generation sequencing panel that included SLCO1B1, CYP2C19, CYP2C9, and VKORC1 together with a custom-designed CYP2D6 testing cascade to genotype the 1013 subjects in laboratories approved by the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act. Actionable PGx variants were placed in patient's electronic medical records where integrated clinical decision support rules alert providers when a relevant medication is ordered. The fraction of this cohort carrying actionable PGx variant(s) in individual genes ranged from 30% (SLCO1B1) to 79% (CYP2D6). When considering all five genes together, 99% of the subjects carried an actionable PGx variant(s) in at least one gene. Our study provides evidence in favor of preemptive PGx testing by identifying the risk of a variant being present in the population we studied.