Identification of populations likely to benefit from pharmacogenomic testing

Pharmacogenomic biomarker information on drug labels of the Spanish Agency of Medicines and Sanitary products: evaluation and comparison with other regulatory agencies

This work aimed to analyse the pharmacogenetic information in the Spanish Drug Regulatory Agency (AEMPS) Summary of Products Characteristics (SmPC), evaluating the presence of pharmacogenetic biomarkers, as well as the associated recommendations. A total of 55.4% of the 1891 drug labels reviewed included information on pharmacogenetic biomarker(s). Pharmacogenomic information appears most frequently in the "antineoplastic and immunomodulating agents", "nervous system", and "cardiovascular system" Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical groups. A total of 509 different pharmacogenetic biomarkers were found, of which CYP450 enzymes accounted for almost 34% of the total drug-biomarker associations evaluated. A total of 3679 drug-biomarker pairs were identified, 102 of which were at the 1A level (PharmGKB® classification system), and 33.33% of these drug-pharmacogenetic biomarker pairs were assigned to "actionable PGx", 12.75% to "informative PGx", 4.9% to "testing recommended", and 4.9% to "testing required". The rate of coincidence in the assigned PGx level of recommendation between the AEMPS and regulatory agencies included in the PharmGKB® Drug Label Annotations database (i.e., the FDA, EMA, SWISS Medic, PMDA, and HCSC) ranged from 45% to 65%, being 'actionable level' the most frequent. On the other hand, discrepancies between agencies did not exceed 35%. This study highlights the presence of relevant pharmacogenetic information on Spanish drug labels, which would help avoid interactions, toxicity, or lack of treatment efficacy.

Patient-Level Exposure to Actionable Pharmacogenomic Medications in a Nationally Representative Insurance Claims Database

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of exposure to pharmacogenomic medications is well established but little is known about how long patients are exposed to these medications.

AIM

Our objective was to describe the amount of exposure to actionable pharmacogenomic medications using patient-level measures among a large nationally representative population using an insurance claims database.

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort study included adults (18+ years) from the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus for Academics claims database with incident fills of 72 Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium level A, A/B, or B medications from January 2012 through September 2018. Patient-level outcomes included the proportion of days covered (PDC), number of fills, and average days supplied per fill over a 12-month period.

RESULTS

Over 1 million fills of pharmacogenetic medications were identified for 605,355 unique patients. The mean PDC for all medications was 0.21 (SD 0.3), suggesting patients were exposed 21% (77 days) of the year. Medications with the highest PDC (0.55-0.89) included ivacaftor, tamoxifen, clopidogrel, HIV medications, transplant medications, and statins; with the exception of statins, these medications were initiated by fewer patients. Pharmacogenomic medications were filled an average of 2.8 times (SD 3.0, range 1-81) during the year following the medication's initiation, and the average days supplied for each fill was 22.3 days (SD 22.4, range 1-180 days).

CONCLUSION

Patient characteristics associated with more medication exposure were male sex, older age, and comorbid chronic conditions. Prescription fill data provide patient-level exposure metrics that can further our understanding of pharmacogenomic medication utilization and help inform opportunities for pharmacogenomic testing.

Patient understanding of pharmacogenomic test results in clinical care

OBJECTIVE

Previous research has not objectively assessed patients' comprehension of their pharmacogenomic test results. In this study we assessed understanding of patients who had undergone cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) pharmacogenomic testing.

METHODS

31 semi-structured interviews with patients who underwent CYP2C19 testing after cardiac catheterization and had been sent a brochure, letter, and wallet card explaining their results. Answers to Likert and binary questions were summarized with descriptive statistics. Qualitative data were analyzed using a grounded theory approach, with particular focus on categorization.

RESULTS

No participants knew the name of the gene tested or their metabolizer status. Seven participants (23%) knew whether the testing identified any medications that would have lower effectiveness or increased adverse effects for them at standard doses ("Adequate Understanding"). Four participants (13%) read their results from the letter or wallet card they received but had no independent understanding ("Reliant on Written Materials"). Ten participants remembered receiving the written materials (32%).

CONCLUSION

A majority of participants who had undergone CYP2C19 PGx testing did not understand their results at even a minimal level and would be unable to communicate them to future providers.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Further research is necessary to improve patient understanding of PGx testing and their results, potentially through improving patient-provider communication.

Novel biomarkers for drug-induced liver injury

INTRODUCTION

Liver toxicity due to medicines (drug-induced liver injury) is a challenge for clinicians and drug developers. There are well-established biomarkers of drug-induced liver injury, which are widely used and validated by decades of clinical experience. These include alanine aminotransferase and bilirubin. Limitations of the current biomarkers are well described, and this has resulted in global efforts to identify and develop new candidates. This process has been aided by regulatory pathways being established for biomarker qualification. This article aims to provide a broad overview of the mechanisms of liver toxicity and discuss emerging novel biomarkers. There is a focus on the recent advances in the identification and validation of novel biomarkers, their potential applications in drug development and clinical practice, and the challenges and opportunities in translating these biomarkers into routine clinical use.

CURRENT GOLD-STANDARD BIOMARKERS

Alanine and aspartate aminotransferase activities perform well in diagnosing established drug-induced liver injury but may lack specificity and are not prognostic.

THE BURDEN OF PROOF FOR NOVEL BIOMARKERS

The amount of evidence required for a new biomarker will depend on its context-of-use, specifically on the impact on patient outcome of a false negative or false positive result.

LEADING POTENTIAL BIOMARKERS

Cytokeratin-18, glutamate dehydrogenase, microRNA-122, high-mobility group box 1 proteins, osteopontin, and macrophage colony-stimulating factor receptor 1 are examples of lead candidates.

POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS OF NOVEL BIOMARKERS

The early detection of drug-induced liver injury, interpretation of an alanine aminotransferase activity increase, and decisions about dose escalation in clinical trials may all be informed by new biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

There have been numerous exploratory studies describing differences in biomarkers and their potential value in risk-stratifying populations or identifying specific patients who may be failed by current assessment protocols. Additionally, the use of exploratory biomarkers to guide clinical trial decision-making is becoming routine. The challenge is now clinically validating leading candidate biomarkers in the assessment of patients presenting with conditions such as paracetamol overdose, which place them at risk of acute liver injury. This will require robust clinical trials. If the use of these biomarkers is to be widely adopted, they will need to unequivocally demonstrate benefit in overall cost, morbidity or mortality.

Cardiovascular precision medicine - A pharmacogenomic perspective

Precision medicine envisages the integration of an individual's clinical and biological features obtained from laboratory tests, imaging, high-throughput omics and health records, to drive a personalised approach to diagnosis and treatment with a higher chance of success. As only up to half of patients respond to medication prescribed following the current one-size-fits-all treatment strategy, the need for a more personalised approach is evident. One of the routes to transforming healthcare through precision medicine is pharmacogenomics (PGx). Around 95% of the population is estimated to carry one or more actionable pharmacogenetic variants and over 75% of adults over 50 years old are on a prescription with a known PGx association. Whilst there are compelling examples of pharmacogenomic implementation in clinical practice, the case for cardiovascular PGx is still evolving. In this review, we shall summarise the current status of PGx in cardiovascular diseases and look at the key enablers and barriers to PGx implementation in clinical practice.

Targeting PSAT1 to mitigate metastasis in tumors with p53-72Pro variant

The single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) of p53, in particular the codon 72 variants, has recently been implicated as a critical regulator in tumor progression. However, the underlying mechanism remains elusive. Here we found that cancer cells carrying codon 72-Pro variant of p53 showed impaired metastatic potential upon serine supplementation. Proteome-wide mapping of p53-interacting proteins uncovered a specific interaction of the codon 72 proline variant (but not p53^72R) with phosphoserine aminotransferase 1 (PSAT1). Interestingly, p53^72P-PSAT1 interaction resulted in dissociation of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ coactivator 1α (PGC-1α) that otherwise bound to p53^72P, leading to subsequent nuclear translocation of PGC-1α and activation of oxidative phosphorylation (OXPHOS) and tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle. Depletion of PSAT1 restored p53^72P-PGC-1α interaction and impeded the OXPHOS and TCA function, resulting in mitochondrial dysfunction and metastasis suppression. Notably, pharmacological targeting the PSAT1-p53^72P interaction by aminooxyacetic acid (AOA) crippled the growth of liver cancer cells carrying the p53^72P variant in both in vitro and patient-derived xenograft models. Moreover, AOA plus regorafenib, an FDA-proved drug for hepatocellular carcinoma and colorectal cancer, achieved a better anti-tumor effect on tumors carrying the p53^72P variant. Therefore, our findings identified a gain of function of the p53^72P variant on mitochondrial function and provided a promising precision strategy to treat tumors vulnerable to p53^72P-PSAT1 perturbation.

Advancing Pharmacogenomics from Single-Gene to Preemptive Testing

Pharmacogenomic testing can be an effective tool to enhance medication safety and efficacy. Pharmacogenomically actionable medications are widely used, and approximately 90-95% of individuals have an actionable genotype for at least one pharmacogene. For pharmacogenomic testing to have the greatest impact on medication safety and clinical care, genetic information should be made available at the time of prescribing (preemptive testing). However, the use of preemptive pharmacogenomic testing is associated with some logistical concerns, such as consistent reimbursement, processes for reporting preemptive results over an individual's lifetime, and result portability. Lessons can be learned from institutions that have implemented preemptive pharmacogenomic testing. In this review, we discuss the rationale and best practices for implementing pharmacogenomics preemptively.

Associations of CYP2C19 and F2R genetic polymorphisms with platelet reactivity in Chinese ischemic stroke patients receiving clopidogrel therapy

OBJECTIVES

Genetic variation has been considered a major contributor to the high variability in the response to dual antiplatelet therapy in patients with acute ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack. Recently, incidences of ischemic stroke are increasing rapidly in China. We aimed to evaluate the influence of potential determinants on the response of antiplatelet therapy and adverse events in Chinese ischemic stroke patients receiving clopidogrel-aspirin treatment.

METHODS

Based on the clopidogrel drug response pathway and the coagulation and anticoagulation function, we systematically selected 34 genetic polymorphisms in 12 candidate genes. Three hundred and eight patients were divided into 2 groups according to their degree of inhibition of platelet aggregation. Multivariate analysis was then performed to assess the influence of demographic, clinical and genetic factors on platelet reactivity in Chinese ischemic stroke patients.

RESULTS

We found that polymorphisms in CYP2C19 and F2R genes were still significantly associated with platelet reactivity in Chinese ischemic stroke patients (P = 0.037 and 0.015). The newly identified rs168753 in F2R gene may influence the efficacy to clopidogrel-aspirin therapy for ischemic stroke patients. We also found that ischemic stroke patients with low level of inhibition of platelet aggregation had higher risk of recurrent ischemic events (P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Together, these results emphasized the necessity of genotype-directed antiplatelet therapy and facilitated to minimize adverse ischemic events.

Comfort with Pharmacogenetic Testing Amongst Pediatric Oncology Providers and Their Patients

Background: Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing, a component of personalized medicine, aims to ensure treatment efficacy while reducing side effects and symptoms. Before this testing becomes routine in the pediatric oncology population, nurses need to understand the knowledge and concerns of providers, patients, and family members with regard to the timing, extent, interpretation, and incorporation of PGx testing. Methods: As part of a comprehensive PGx study (larger study) for children diagnosed with cancer, we surveyed providers and caregivers of children with cancer about their knowledge of and comfort with PGx testing. Caregivers who declined to participate in the larger PGx study were also asked to participate in the survey. Chi-square tests and a two-sample t-test were used to compare variables. Results: One hundred and two participants from the larger PGx study and 12 families who refused (response rate of 77% and 54%, respectively) as well as 29 providers (88%) completed surveys. Families not on the study were less interested in and comfortable with PGx results. Both groups were concerned about health or life insurance discrimination and payment. Providers would like support in ordering PGx testing and interpreting PGx. Discussion: Providers remain wary of most PGx testing, uncomfortable with interpreting and applying the results. Families are interested in the possibilities of personalized prescribing while worried about who has access to their child's genetic information. Further education on relevant tests for providers, including nurses, and the testing process for families, including details on privacy and sharing of genetic information, appear necessary.

Comparison of FDA Table of Pharmacogenetic Associations and Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines

Purpose

Healthcare professionals need a clear understanding of information about gene-drug interactions in order to make optimal use of pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing. In this report, we compare PGx information in the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Table of Pharmacogenetic Associations with information presented in Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines.

Summary

Information from CPIC guidelines and the FDA Table of Pharmacogenetic Associations do not have a high level of concordance. Many drugs mentioned in CPIC guidelines are not listed in the FDA table and vice versa, and the same gene-drug association and dosing recommendation was reported for only 5 of the 126 drugs included in either source. Furthermore, classification of drugs in specific sections of the FDA table does not correlate well with CPIC-assigned or provisionally assigned clinical actionability levels. The Pharmacogenomics Knowledge Base (PharmGKB) clinical annotation levels are generally high for drugs mentioned in CPIC guidelines. PharmGKB clinical annotation levels are often unassigned or are lower level for drugs listed on the FDA table but not in CPIC guidelines. These differences may be due in part to FDA having access to PGx information that is unavailable in published literature and/or because PGx classifications are based on criteria other than clinical actionability.

Conclusion

There are important differences between the PGx information presented in the FDA Table of Pharmacogenetic Associations and in CPIC guidelines. FDA and CPIC have different perspectives when evaluating PGx associations and use different approaches and information resources when considering clinical validity related to specific medicines. Understanding how information sources developed by each group differ and can be used together to form a holistic view of PGx may be helpful in increasing adoption of these information sources in practice.

Tramadol Use in Perioperative Care and Current Controversies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to discuss the use of tramadol in the perioperative period. There is no doubt that tramadol has revolutionized pain treatment, making it important to understand the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in order to provide patients with the safest and most effective analgesia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Tramadol is a centrally acting synthetic analgesic with a multimode of action used to help treat moderate to severe pain. Pharmacologically, the unique opioid acts as a serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, while its metabolite, O-desmethyltramadol, acts on the μ-opioid receptor. The analgesic strength of tramadol is about one-tenth that of morphine, making it a relatively safe analgesic. Potential side effects of tramadol include nausea, vomiting, constipation, pruritus, and respiratory depression; however, the severity of these symptoms is minimal compared to traditional opioids. Although some of the perioperative uses of tramadol may be rare, it is a pain management option to consider when alternatives have proved ineffective.

Implementation of Pharmacogenomics and Artificial Intelligence Tools for Chronic Disease Management in Primary Care Setting

Chronic disease management often requires use of multiple drug regimens that lead to polypharmacy challenges and suboptimal utilization of healthcare services. While the rising costs and healthcare utilization associated with polypharmacy and drug interactions have been well documented, effective tools to address these challenges remain elusive. Emerging evidence that proactive medication management, combined with pharmacogenomic testing, can lead to improved health outcomes and reduced cost burdens may help to address such gaps. In this report, we describe informatic and bioanalytic methodologies that integrate weak signals in symptoms and chief complaints with pharmacogenomic analysis of ~90 single nucleotide polymorphic variants, CYP2D6 copy number, and clinical pharmacokinetic profiles to monitor drug–gene pairs and drug–drug interactions for medications with significant pharmacogenomic profiles. The utility of the approach was validated in a virtual patient case showing detection of significant drug–gene and drug–drug interactions of clinical significance. This effort is being used to establish proof-of-concept for the creation of a regional database to track clinical outcomes in patients enrolled in a bioanalytically-informed medication management program. Our integrated informatic and bioanalytic platform can provide facile clinical decision support to inform and augment medication management in the primary care setting.

Retrospective Review of Pharmacogenetic Testing at an Academic Children's Hospital

There is limited evidence to support pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing in children. We conducted a retrospective review of PGx testing among 452 patients at an academic children's hospital to determine the potential utility of PGx in diseases of childhood and to identify targets for future pediatric pharmacogenetic research. An actionable gene-drug pair associated with the 28 genes tested (Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) level A or B, Pharmacogenomics Knowledge Base (PharmGKB) level 1A or B, or US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommendation and a PharmGKB level) was present in 98.7% of patients. We identified 203 actionable gene-drug-diagnosis groups based on the indications for each actionable drug listed in Lexicomp. Among patients with an actionable gene-drug-diagnosis group, 49.3% had a diagnosis where the drug was a therapeutic option and PGx could be used to guide treatment selection. Among patients with an associated diagnosis, 30.9% had a prescription for the actionable drug allowing PGx guided dosing. Three genes (CYP2C19, CYP2D6, and CYP3A5) accounted for all the gene-drug-diagnosis groups with matching diagnoses and prescriptions. The most common gene-drug-diagnosis groups with matching diagnoses and prescriptions were CYP2C19-citalopram-escitalopram-depression 3.3% of patients tested; CYP2C19-dexlansoprazole-gastritis-esophagitis 3.1%; CYP2C19-omeprazole-gastritis-esophagitis 2.4%; CYP2D6-atomoxetine-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder 2.2%; and CYP2C19-citalopram-escitalopram-obsessive-compulsive disorder 1.5%. PGx could be used to guide selection of current treatment options or medication dosing in almost half (48.7%) of pediatric patients tested. Mood disorders and gastritis/esophagitis are promising targets for future study of PGx testing because of the high prevalence of these diagnoses and associated actionable gene-drug pairs in the pediatric population.