PharmVar Tutorial on CYP2D6 Structural Variation Testing and Recommendations on Reporting

CYP2D6 copy number determination using digital PCR

Background

CYP2D6 testing is increasingly used to guide drug therapy and thus, reliable methods are needed to test this complex and polymorphic gene locus. A particular challenge arises from the detection and interpretation of structural variants (SVs) including gene deletions, duplications, and hybrids with the CYP2D7 pseudogene. This study validated the Absolute Q™ platform for digital PCR-based CYP2D6 copy number variation (CNV) determination by comparing results to those obtained with a previously established method using the QX200 platform. In addition, protocols for streamlining CYP2D6 CNV testing were established and validated including the "One-pot" single-step restriction enzyme digestion and a multiplex assay simultaneously targeting the CYP2D6 5'UTR, intron 6, and exon 9 regions.

Methods

Genomic DNA (gDNA) samples from Coriell (n = 13) and from blood, saliva, and liver tissue (n = 17) representing 0-6 copies were tested on the Absolute Q and QX200 platforms. Custom TaqMan™ copy number (CN) assays targeting CYP2D6 the 5'UTR, intron 6, and exon 9 regions and a reference gene assay (TERT or RNaseP) were combined for multiplexing by optical channel. In addition, two digestion methods (One-pot digestion and traditional) were assessed. Inconclusive CN values on the Absolute Q were resolved using an alternate reference gene and/or diluting gDNA.

Results

Overall, results between the two platforms and digestions methods were consistent. The "One-pot" digestion method and optically multiplexing up to three CYP2D6 regions yielded consistent result across DNA sample types and diverse SVs, reliably detecting up to 6 gene copies. Rare variation in reference genes were found to interfere with results and interpretation, which were resolved by using a different reference.

Conclusion

The Absolute Q produced accurate and reliable CYP2D6 copy number results allowing for a streamlined and economical protocol using One-pot digestion and multiplexing three target regions. Protocols are currently being expanded to other pharmacogenes presenting with SVs/CNVs.

Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline (CPIC) for CYP2D6, ADRB1, ADRB2, ADRA2C, GRK4, and GRK5 Genotypes and Beta-Blocker Therapy

Beta-blockers are widely used medications for a variety of indications, including heart failure, myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmias, and hypertension. Genetic variability in pharmacokinetic (e.g., CYP2D6) and pharmacodynamic (e.g., ADRB1, ADRB2, ADRA2C, GRK4, GRK5) genes have been studied in relation to beta-blocker exposure and response. We searched and summarized the strength of the evidence linking beta-blocker exposure and response with the six genes listed above. The level of evidence was high for associations between CYP2D6 genetic variation and both metoprolol exposure and heart rate response. Evidence indicates that CYP2D6 poor metabolizers experience clinically significant greater exposure and lower heart rate in response to metoprolol compared with those who are not poor metabolizers. Therefore, we provide therapeutic recommendations regarding genetically predicted CYP2D6 metabolizer status and metoprolol therapy. However, there was insufficient evidence to make therapeutic recommendations for CYP2D6 and other beta-blockers or for any beta-blocker and the other five genes evaluated (updates at www.cpicpgx.org).

Influence of CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 on side effects of aripiprazole and risperidone: A systematic review

Variability in hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes such as 2C19 and 2D6 may influence side-effect and efficacy outcomes for antipsychotics. Aripiprazole and risperidone are two commonly prescribed antipsychotics, metabolized primarily through CYP2D6. Here, we aimed to provide an overview of the effect of CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 on side-effects of aripiprazole and risperidone, and expand on existing literature by critically examining methodological issues associated with pharmacogenetic studies. A PRISMA compliant search of six electronic databases (Pubmed, PsychInfo, Embase, Central, Web of Science, and Google Scholar) identified pharmacogenetic studies on aripiprazole and risperidone. 2007 publications were first identified, of which 34 were included. Quality of literature was estimated using Newcastle-Ottowa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) and revised Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. The average NOS score was 5.8 (range: 3-8) for risperidone literature and 5 for aripiprazole (range: 4-6). All RCTs on aripiprazole were rated as high risk of bias, and four out of six for risperidone literature. Study populations ranged from healthy volunteers to inpatient individuals in psychiatric units and included adult and pediatric samples. All n = 34 studies examined CYP2D6. Only one study genotyped for CYP2C19 and found a positive association with neurological side-effects of risperidone. Most studies did not report any relationship between CYP2D6 and any side-effect outcome. Heterogeneity between and within studies limited the ability to synthesize data and draw definitive conclusions. Studies lacked statistical power due to small sample size, selective genotyping methods, and study design. Large-scale randomized trials with multiple measurements, providing robust evidence on this topic, are suggested.

Developments in pharmacogenetics, pharmacogenomics, and personalized medicine

The development of Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics in Western Europe is highly relevant in the worldwide scenario. Despite the usually low institutional support, many research groups, composed of basic and clinical researchers, have been actively working for decades in this field. Their contributions made an international impact and paved the way for further studies and pharmacogenomics implementation in clinical practice. In this manuscript, that makes part of the Special Issue entitled Spanish Pharmacology, we present an analysis of the state of the art of Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics research in Europe, we compare it with the developments in Spain, and we summarize the most salient contributions since 1988 to the present, as well as recent developments in the clinical application of pharmacogenomics knowledge. Finally, we present some considerations on how we could improve translation to clinical practice in this specific scenario.