Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacogenomic and Pharmacogenetic Test-Guided Personalized Therapies: A Systematic Review of the Approved Active Substances for Personalized Medicine in Germany

Assessing the utility of measurement methods applied in economic evaluations of pharmacogenomics applications

An increasing number of economic evaluations are published annually investigating the economic effectiveness of pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing. This work was designed to provide a comprehensive summary of the available utility methods used in cost-effectiveness/cost-utility analysis studies of PGx interventions. A comprehensive review was conducted to identify economic analysis studies using a utility valuation method for PGx testing. A total of 82 studies met the inclusion criteria. A majority of studies were from the USA and used the EuroQol-5D questionnaire, as the utility valuation method. Cardiovascular disorders was the most studied therapeutic area while discrete-choice studies mainly focused on patients' willingness to undergo PGx testing. Future research in applying other methodologies in PGx economic evaluation studies would improve the current research environment and provide better results.

An Assessment of the Knowledge and Perceptions of Precision Medicine (PM) in the Rwandan Healthcare Setting

INTRODUCTION

Precision medicine (PM) or personalized medicine is an innovative approach that aims to tailor disease prevention and treatment to consider the differences in people's genes, environments, and lifestyles. Although many efforts have been made to accelerate the universal adoption of PM, several challenges need to be addressed in order to advance PM in Africa. Therefore, our study aimed to establish baseline data on the knowledge and perceptions of the implementation of PM in the Rwandan healthcare setting.

METHOD

A descriptive qualitative study was conducted in five hospitals offering diagnostics and oncology services to cancer patients in Rwanda. To understand the existing policies regarding PM implementation in the country, two additional institutions were surveyed: the Ministry of Health (MOH), which creates and sets policies for the overall vision of the health sector, and the Rwanda Biomedical Center (RBC), which coordinates the implementation of health sector policies in the country. The researchers conducted 32 key informant interviews and assessed the functionality of available PM equipment in the 5 selected health facilities. The data were thematically categorized and analyzed.

RESULTS

The study revealed that PM is perceived as a complex and expensive program by most health managers and health providers. The most cited challenges to implementing PM included the following: the lack of policies and guidelines; the lack of supportive infrastructures and limited suppliers of required equipment and laboratory consumables; financial constraints; cultural, behavioral, and religious beliefs; and limited trained, motivated, and specialized healthcare providers. Regarding access to health services for cancer treatment, patients with health insurance pay 10% of their medical costs, which is still too expensive for Rwandans.

CONCLUSION

The study participants highlighted the importance of PM to enhance healthcare delivery if the identified barriers are addressed. For instance, Rwandan health sector leadership might consider the creation of specialized oncology centers in all or some referral hospitals with all the necessary genomic equipment and trained staff to serve the needs of the country and implement a PM program.

Upfront DPYD Genotype-Guided Treatment for Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy in Advanced and Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Fluoropyrimidines are the most widely used chemotherapy drugs for advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Individuals with certain DPYD gene variants are exposed to an increased risk of severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicities. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of preemptive DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC.

METHODS

Overall survival of DPYD wild-type patients who received a standard dose and variant carriers treated with a reduced dose were analyzed by parametric survival models. A decision tree and a partitioned survival analysis model with a lifetime horizon were designed, taking the Iranian healthcare perspective. Input parameters were extracted from the literature or expert opinion. To address parameter uncertainty, scenario and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, the genotype-guided treatment strategy was cost-saving ($41.7). Nevertheless, due to a possible reduction in the survival of patients receiving reduced-dose regimens, it was associated with fewer quality-adjusted life-years (9.45 vs 9.28). In sensitivity analyses, the prevalence of DPYD variants had the most significant impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The genotyping strategy would remain cost-saving, as long as the genotyping cost is < $49 per test. In a scenario in which we assumed equal efficacy for the 2 strategies, genotyping was the dominant strategy, associated with less costs (∼$1) and more quality-adjusted life-years (0.1292).

CONCLUSIONS

DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine treatment in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC is cost-saving from the perspective of the Iranian health system.

Evaluating the quality of the economic evidence in colorectal cancer genomics studies

The increase in the use of genome-based screening and diagnostic tests adds to the overall costs of oncologic care for colorectal cancer. This, in turn, has resulted in an increase in published economic analyses. Aim: To perform a systematic literature review of the available economic evidence evaluating the value of genomic testing for colorectal cancer and appraise the quality of the economic studies conducted to date. Methods: A systematic review of the literature for economic studies of colorectal cancer genomics from January 2006 through October 2020, and evaluation of study quality using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument was conducted. The validated QHES was then applied to a final set of articles that met eligibility criteria. Results: Our search of the literature initially yielded 12,859 records. A final set of 49 articles met our inclusion criteria. The QHES score ranged from 24 to 100, with an average score of 82. Most of the studies (n = 40, 82%) scored above 75 and were considered of good quality. Conclusion: Our analysis revealed that most of the economic analyses of colorectal cancer genomic molecular diagnostics in the literature may be of good quality. There is, however, some variation in methodological rigor between the articles.

Assessing the cost-effectiveness of precision medicine: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Precision medicine (PM) involves gene testing to identify disease risk, enable early diagnosis or guide therapeutic choice, and targeted gene therapy. We aim to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to quantify the cost-effectiveness profile of PM stratified by intervention type, identify sources of heterogeneity in the value-for-money of PM.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will perform a systematic search in Embase, MEDLINE, EconLit and CRD databases for studies published in English language or with translation in English between 1 January 2011 and 8 July 2021 on the topic of cost-effectiveness analysis of PM interventions. The focus will be on studies that reported health and economic outcomes. Study quality will be assessed using the Biases in Economic Studies checklist. The incremental net benefit of PM screening, diagnostic, treatment-targeting and therapeutic interventions over conventional strategies will be respectively pooled across studies using a random-effect model if heterogeneity is present, otherwise a fixed-effect model. Subgroup analyses will be performed based on disease area, WHO region and World Bank country-income level. Additionally, we will identify the potential sources of heterogeneity with random-effect meta-regressions. Finally, biases will be detected using jackknife sensitivity analysis, funnel plot assessment and Egger's tests.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

For this type of study ethics approval or formal consent is not required. The results will be disseminated at various presentations and feedback sessions, in conference abstracts and manuscripts that will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021272956.

A systematic review of pharmacogenetic testing in primary care: Attitudes of patients, general practitioners, and pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenetic testing enhances patient safety by improving medical treatment and reducing side effects. It has shown potential in both primary and secondary care. However, implementation in healthcare, particularly in primary care, is slow.

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to review articles published on the attitudes towards, and knowledge on pharmacogenetic testing in primary care, among general practitioners, pharmacists, and patients.

METHODS

The review was performed according to the PRISMA checklist. A systemized literature search was followed by a 2-step screening process. Apart from the content of articles being within the scope of the review, inclusion criteria included: articles in English; primary research articles; qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods. Content analysis was conducted as a qualitative meta-synthesis. The methodological rigor of included articles was assessed.

RESULTS

Fifteen studies were included. The analysis resulted in the following main themes: i) benefits of pharmacogenetic testing, ii) barriers to pharmacogenetic testing, iii) pharmacists' role in pharmacogenetic counselling, and iv) pharmacists' knowledge on pharmacogenetics. Methodological rigor was generally medium/high.

CONCLUSIONS

More studies are needed in this area, and there is a need for more education on pharmacogenetic testing for healthcare professionals. Issues like patient autonomy, economy, and access to tests also need to be addressed.

Economic Impact of the Application of a Precision Medicine Model (5SPM) on Psychotic Patients

Background

Schizophrenia is a severe mental disorder that often manifests within the first three decades of life. Its prognosis is uncertain and may result in a prolonged treatment that could extend throughout the entire lifespan of the patient. Antipsychotic drugs are characterized by a high interindividual variability when considering therapeutic effect and emergence of adverse effects. Such interindividual variability is thought to be associated primarily with pharmacokinetic matters.

Objective

The objective of this study was to evaluate the economic impact of the application of the 5-Step Precision Medicine model (5SPM), an approach based on the pharmacogenetic analysis of the primary genes involved in the metabolism of the therapy for each patient, restructuring treatment as necessary.

Patients and Methods

One hundred eighty-eight psychiatry patients were analysed for single nucleotide polymorphisms on genes CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, CYP3A5 and ABCB1. Information on patients' diagnosis, pharmacotherapy, and hospitalizations was collected.

Results

We achieved a cost-benefit ratio of 3.31-3.59 with a reduction of direct cost (hospitalizations plus pharmacotherapy) with a reduction of total cost in 67% of the patients who underwent the clinical intervention.

Conclusion

A rational Precision Medicine-based approach to psychiatric patients could result in a reduction on number of drugs required to control exacerbations, and the underlying pathologies, reducing the risk of adverse effects and improving adherence to treatment, leading to a potential decrease in direct costs. This methodology has been shown to be cost-dominant and, being based on a pharmacogenetic analysis, it has a lifelong nature, as the data obtained can be applied to other medical disciplines.

Guidance for the Harmonisation and Improvement of Economic Evaluations of Personalised Medicine

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to develop guidance contributing to improved consistency and quality in economic evaluations of personalised medicine (PM), given current ambiguity about how to measure the value of PM as well as considerable variation in the methodology and reporting in economic evaluations of PM.

METHODS

A targeted literature review of methodological papers was performed for an overview of modelling challenges in PM. Expert interviews were held to discuss best modelling practice. A systematic literature review of economic evaluations of PM was conducted to gain insight into current modelling practice. The findings were synthesised and used to develop a set of draft recommendations. The draft recommendations were discussed at a stakeholder workshop and subsequently finalised.

RESULTS

Twenty-two methodological papers were identified. Some argued that the challenges in modelling PM can be addressed within existing methodological frameworks, others disagreed. Eighteen experts were interviewed. They believed large uncertainty to be a key concern. Out of 195 economic evaluations of PM identified, 56% addressed none of the identified modelling challenges. A set of 23 recommendations was developed. Eight recommendations focus on the modelling of test-treatment pathways. The use of non-randomised controlled trial data is discouraged but several recommendations are provided in case randomised controlled trial data are unavailable. The parameterisation of structural uncertainty is recommended. Other recommendations consider perspective and discounting; premature survival data; additional value elements; patient and clinician compliance; and managed entry agreements.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a comprehensive list of recommendations to modellers of PM and to evaluators and reviewers of PM models.

Pharmacogenetic testing in psychiatry and neurology: an overview of reviews

Pharmacogenetic testing is available to healthcare professionals to guide drug selection and prevent adverse events. However, its implementation in the clinical practice of psychiatry/neurology still has barriers, mainly due to a lack of evidence. We conducted a literature search on Cochrane Library, Embase and Pubmed, from their inception to 18 June 2020. We included 16 published systematic reviews. The most studied drug categories were anticonvulsants and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors associated with human leukocyte antigen and cytochrome P450 genes (HLA-A, HLA-B, CYP2C9, CYP2D6, CYP2C19), classified as critically low quality/low quality. There is a need for more robust studies with adequate design to assess the potential benefits of adopting pharmacogenetics in health systems and services.

Predictive association of ABCB1 C3435T genetic polymorphism with the efficacy or safety of lopinavir and ritonavir in COVID-19 patients

Lopinavir and ritonavir are substrates of permeability glycoprotein encoded by ABCB1. The efficacy and safety of these drugs is unknown in COVID-19 patients affected by ABCB1 genetic variability. Patients carrying one or two copies of the ABCB1 C3435T were predictively considered as risk phenotypes. It was predicted that risk phenotypes due to carrying either one or two copies of ABCB1 C3435T were highly prevalent in Europe (76.8%; 95% CI: 75-78), followed by America (67%; 95% CI: 65-69), Asia (63.5%; 95% CI: 62-65) and Africa (41.4%; 95% CI: 37-46), respectively. It is hypothesized that a considerable proportion of COVID-19 patients treated with lopinavir/ritonavir inheriting ABCB1 C3435T genetic polymorphism may be predisposed to either therapeutic failure or toxicity.

Pharmacogenomics Implementation and Hurdles to Overcome; In the Context of a Developing Country

Having multiple dimensions, uncertainties and several stakeholders, the costly pharmacogenomics (PGx) is associated with dynamic implementation complexities. Identification of these challenges is critical to harness its full potential, especially in developing countries with fragile healthcare systems and scarce resources. This is the first study aimed to identify most salient challenges related to PGx implementation, with respect to the experiences of early-adopters and local experts' prospects, in the context of a developing country in the Middle East. To perform a comprehensive reconnaissance on PGx adoption challenges a scoping literature review was conducted based on national drug policy components: efficacy/safety, access, affordability and rational use of medicine (RUM). Strategic option development and analysis workshop method with cognitive mapping as the technique was used to evaluate challenges in the context of Iran. The cognitive maps were face-validated and analyzed via Decision Explorer XML. The findings indicated a complex network of issues relative to PGx adoption, categorized in national drug policy indicators. In the rational use of medicine category, ethics, education, bench -to- bedside strategies, guidelines, compliance, and health system issues were found. Clinical trial issues, test's utility, and biomarker validation were identified in the efficacy group. Affordability included pricing, reimbursement, and value assessment issues. Finally, access category included regulation, availability, and stakeholder management challenges. The current study identified the most significant challenges ahead of clinical implementation of PGx in a developing country. This could be the basis of a policy-note development in future work, which may consolidate vital communication among stakeholders and accelerate the efficient implementation in developing new-comer countries.

Influence of metabolic profiles on the safety of drug therapy in routine care in Germany: protocol of the cohort study EMPAR

INTRODUCTION

Pre-emptive testing of pharmacogenetically relevant single-nucleotide polymorphisms can be an effective tool in the prevention of adverse drug reactions and therapy resistance. However, most of the tests are not used as standard in routine care in Germany because of lacking evidence for the clinical and economical benefit and their impact on the usage of healthcare services. We address this issue by investigating the influence of pharmacogenetic profiles on the use of healthcare services over an extended period of several years using routine care data from a statutory health insurance company. The goal is to provide clinical evidence whether pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing of metabolic profiles in routine care in Germany is beneficial and cost-effective.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The EMPAR (Einfluss metabolischer Profile auf die Arzneimitteltherapiesicherheit in der Routineversorgung) study is a non-interventional cohort study conducted to analyse pharmacogenetic risk factors that are important for drug therapy by means of endpoints relevant for healthcare. The analysis is based on pharmacogenetic profiles and statutory health insurance data. We perform pharmacogenetic, pharmacoepidemiological and pharmacoeconomic analyses using health care utilisation scores and machine learning techniques. Therefore, we aim to include about 10 000 patients (≥18 years) insured by the health insurance provider Techniker Krankenkasse. The study focuses on patients with prescriptions of anticoagulants and prescriptions of cholesterol-lowering drugs. Also, a screening for special pharmacogenetic characteristics will be performed in patients with at least one Y57.9! diagnosis (Complication of medical and surgical care: drug or medicament, unspecified). Outcomes include the utilisation of health insurance services, the incidence of incapacity for work and costs for drugs and treatment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Medical Faculty, University of Bonn (Lfd. Nr. 339/17). The results of this research project will be published in scientific open access journals and at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS00013909.

Cost-effectiveness of precision medicine: a scoping review

Objectives

Precision medicine (PM) aims to improve patient outcomes by stratifying or individualizing diagnosis and treatment decisions. Previous reviews found inconclusive evidence as to the cost-effectiveness of PM. The purpose of this scoping review was to describe current research findings on the cost-effectiveness of PM and to identify characteristics of cost-effective interventions.

Methods

We searched PubMed with a combination of terms related to PM and economic evaluations and included studies published between 2014 and 2017.

Results

A total of 83 articles were included, of which two-thirds were published in Europe and the USA. The majority of studies concluded that the PM intervention was at least cost-effective compared to usual care. However, the willingness-to-pay thresholds varied widely. Key factors influencing cost-effectiveness included the prevalence of the genetic condition in the target population, costs of genetic testing and companion treatment and the probability of complications or mortality.

Conclusions

This review may help inform decisions about reimbursement, research and development of PM interventions.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s00038-019-01298-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Pre-approval incentives to promote adoption of personalized medicine: a theoretical approach

BACKGROUND

Currently, personalised medicine is becoming more frequently used and many drug companies are including this strategy to gain market access for very specialized therapies. In this article, in order to understand the relationships between the health authority and the drug company when deciding upon the implementation of personalized medicines, we take a theoretical perspective to model it when the price and reimbursement policy follows a pay-for-performance scheme. During the development of a new drug, the firm must decide whether to generate additional knowledge by investing in additional resources to stratify the target population based on a biomarker or directly apply for marketing authorization for the new treatment without information on the characteristics of patients who could respond to it. In this context, we assume that the pricing policy is set by the health authority, and then we characterize the pricing and investment decisions contingent on the rate of response to the treatment.

RESULTS

We find that the price when the firm carries out R&D leading to the personalized treatments is not necessarily higher than the price if the firm does not carry out the R&D investment. When the rate of response to the treatment is too low, then the new drug is not marketed. If the rate of response is too high, personalized medicine is not implemented. For intermediate values of the rate of response, the adoption of personalized medicine may occur if the investment costs are sufficiently low; otherwise, the treatment is given to all patients without additional information on their characteristics. The higher the quality of the genetic test (in terms of its sensitivity and specificity), the wider the interval for the values of the proportional responders for which personalized medicine may be implemented.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings show that pre-approval incentives (prices) to promote the personalized treatments depend on the specific characteristics of the disease and the efficacy of the treatment. The model gives an intuitive idea about what to expect in terms of price incentives when the possibility of personalizing treatments becomes a strategic decision for the stakeholders.

Genetic testing for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 suggests improved outcome for antidepressant and antipsychotic medication

Individuals carrying genetic variants that result in non-extensive CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 enzyme activity seem to be more prone to non-response and side-effects of psychotropic medications. Therefore, tailoring prescriptions using genetic information may improve patient outcomes. This study examined treatment outcome in psychiatric care after CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genetic information was provided to patients and physicians. CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotyping, assessment of side effects and medical histories were obtained from 80 subjects who were prescribed either antidepressant or antipsychotic medications. Our measure of outcome was mainly physicians' opinions however UKU side effects scores were also used. For CYP2D6, we calculated an activity score based on genotype and psychiatric medications. Correlation analysis was performed for CYP2D6 activity scores and UKU scores. Overall, we received supportive responses from physicians who enrolled patients in our study. Notably, while almost every fourth physician reported improvement in patient outcome, not a single physician indicated that their patient's symptoms worsened after they had used a pharmacogenetic report to guide treatment. We did not observe statistically significant differences in side effects. Overall, our results suggest improved patient outcome following pharmacogenetic testing; nonetheless, more research is required to assess the exact benefit of pharmacogenetics in clinical practice.

Pharmacogenomic Testing: Clinical Evidence and Implementation Challenges

Pharmacogenomics can enhance patient care by enabling treatments tailored to genetic make-up and lowering risk of serious adverse events. As of June 2019, there are 132 pharmacogenomic dosing guidelines for 99 drugs and pharmacogenomic information is included in 309 medication labels. Recently, the technology for identifying individual-specific genetic variants (genotyping) has become more accessible. Next generation sequencing (NGS) is a cost-effective option for genotyping patients at many pharmacogenomic loci simultaneously, and guidelines for implementation of these data are available from organizations such as the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG). NGS and related technologies are increasing knowledge in the research sphere, yet rates of genomic literacy remain low, resulting in a widening gap in knowledge translation to the patient. Multidisciplinary teams—including physicians, nurses, genetic counsellors, and pharmacists—will need to combine their expertise to deliver optimal pharmacogenomically-informed care.

Economic Value of Pharmacogenetic Testing for Cancer Drugs with Clinically Relevant Drug-Gene Associations: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenetic testing can provide predictive insights about the efficacy and safety of drugs used in cancer treatment. Although many drug-gene associations have been reported in the literature, the strength of evidence supporting each association can vary significantly. Even among the subgroup of drugs classified by the PharmGKB database to have a high or moderate level of evidence, there is limited information regarding the economic value of pharmacogenetic testing.

OBJECTIVES

To: (a) summarize the available pharmacoeconomic evidence assessing the value of pharmacogenetic testing for cancer drugs with clinically relevant drug-gene associations; (b) determine the quality of the studies that contain this evidence; and (c) discuss the quality of this evidence with respect to the level of evidence of the drug-gene associations.

METHODS

The PharmGKB database was used to identify cancer drugs with clinically relevant drug-gene associations graded high (1A, 1B) or moderate (2A, 2B). A systematic literature review was conducted using these drugs. Ovid MEDLINE and Embase databases were searched to identify cost-effectiveness, cost-utility, or cost-minimization studies comparing pharmacogenetic testing to an alternative. Cost and effect values from every relevant comparison within the studies were extracted, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was either extracted or calculated for each comparison. Quality assessment was conducted for each study using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument. Qualitative synthesis was used to summarize the data.

RESULTS

The search yielded 2,191 citations, of which 35 studies met the inclusion criteria. Pharmacoeconomic studies were available for the following drugs from the PharmGKB database: fluoropyrimidine, 6-mercaptopurine, irinotecan, carboplatin, cisplatin, erlotinib, gefitinib, cetuximab, panitumumab, and trastuzumab. The studies were conducted in Asia, Europe, Canada, the United States, and Mexico and reported cost-utility, cost-effectiveness, and cost-minimization outcomes. The mean QHES score was 80 (SD = 22) for the studies of drug-gene pairs with high (1A, 1B) and moderate (2A, 2B) levels of evidence (1A = 82, 1B = 93, 2A = 71, and 2B = 74). There was variation across studies in terms of reporting. 109 relevant comparisons were identified within the studies. Of those that reported cost per life-year or cost per quality-adjusted life-year (n = 58 comparisons), pharmacogenetic testing was dominant in 21% overall and 42%, 21%, 17%, and 5% of the comparisons in Asia, Europe, Canada, and the United States, respectively. Variability was observed in the ICER values regardless of geographic region or drug. Pharmacogenetic testing was cost saving in 17 of 19 cost-minimization comparisons and was favored most frequently when compared with genetically indiscriminate strategies containing the drug of interest.

CONCLUSIONS

There was mixed evidence regarding the value of pharmacogenetic testing to guide cancer treatment. For future pharmacogenomic-related economic studies, we recommend prioritizing clinically relevant drug-gene associations and greater adherence to available best practice guidelines for conducting and reporting economic evaluation studies.

DISCLOSURES

No outside funding supported this review. Part of Hussain's research time was supported by a Merit Review Award (I01 BX000545), Medical Research Service, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. Hussain also reports personal fees from Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, and France Foundation, outside the submitted work. Onukwugha reports grants from Pfizer and Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, along with advisory board fees from Novo Nordisk, outside the submitted work. Faruque, Neuberger, and Noh have nothing to disclose.

Community pharmacists and their role in pharmacogenomics testing: an Australian perspective drawing on international evidence

Patients obtaining a prescription from a pharmacy expect that the drug will be effective and have minimal side-effects. Unfortunately, drugs exhibit the desired effect in ~25-60% of people prescribed any medication. Adverse effects occur at a rate of 10% in patients taking a medication, and this rate increases during and after hospitalisation, with the transition of care back to the ambulatory setting posing a particular risk. Pharmacogenomics testing has been shown to optimise pharmacotherapy by increasing medication effectiveness and reducing drug-related toxicity, thus curtailing overall healthcare costs. Evidence from international studies have shown that community pharmacists would be able to offer this highly relevant professional service to their clients, given suitable training. This specific training complements pharmacists' existing skills and expertise by educating them in an emerging scientific area of pharmacogenomics. However, in an increasingly tight financial climate, the provision of pharmacogenomics testing by Australian community pharmacists will only be viable with an appropriate reimbursement through the Medicare Benefits Schedule, currently accessible by other allied health practitioners but not by pharmacists.

Clinical utility of pharmacogenetic testing in children and adolescents with severe mental disorders

This is a retrospective cohort study of 20 children and adolescents to evaluate the clinical utility of a pharmacogenetic decision support tool. Twenty children and adolescents underwent pharmacogenetic testing between June 2014 and May 2017. All children and adolescents were evaluated at Puerta de Hierro University Hospital-Majadahonda (Madrid, Spain). We report the proportion of patients achieving clinical improvement, amelioration of side effects, and changes in number of drugs. Data normality was assessed with the Shapiro–Wilk test, and changes of pre- and post-pharmacogenetic testing were analyzed with the Wilcoxon test for paired samples. A two-sided p value threshold of 0.05 was considered for significance. Pharmacogenetic testing helped to improve the clinical outcome as measured by the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Scale in virtually all children (95%; 19 out of 20 children). The CGI improvement (CGI-I) was 2 (0.79) (range 1–4), 2.1 (0.56) (range 1–3), and 1.9 (0.99) (range 1–4) in foster and non-foster care children, respectively. Pharmacogenetic testing also helped to reduce the number of children using polypharmacy (from 65 to 45%), the mean number of drugs per children (from 3.3 to 2.4 drugs, p = 0.017), and self-reported relevant side effects (p = 0.006). Pharmacogenetic testing helped to improve the clinical outcome, and to reduce polypharmacy and the number of drugs used in children and adolescents with severe mental disorders. More evidence using robust (i.e., clinical trials) independent studies is required to properly determine the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing tools in children and adolescents with mental disorders.

[New developments in molecularbiological diagnostic]

Today, we have access to excellent and advanced molecular methods that are already widely used. This requires rules to control the quality of the methods as well as the laboratory. Both aspects will be discussed in the article. Following the isolation of nucleic acids they are used for genotyping which allows to address several questions: diagnosis of inherited diseases, inherited predispositions, forensic analyses, identification and typing of bacteria or viruses, elucidation of evolutionary aspects. Importantly, it has to be realized that the type and heterogeneity of phenotypically relevant mutations determines the method used for testing. Today, most laboratories use either PCR analyses or Sanger sequencing for diagnostic applications. However, increasingly next generation sequencing (NGS) is applied. The clinical use of NGS is still very challenging, but we can expect that the switch to regular application of this method will be coming in the very near future. The price for NGS has gone down to approx. USD 1000,- which makes the routine diagnostic use feasible. Nevertheless, several challenges have yet to be solved, such as the processing of the large data volume as well as storage of the data. Supporting data bases exist already and some will be discussed in the article. The understanding of the clinical relevance of many polymorphisms is another issue that has yet to be solved, particularly as in the context of personalized medicine polymorphisms have become increasingly important.