Assessing feasibility of delivering pharmacogenetic testing in a community pharmacy setting

Mapping the implementation of pharmacogenomic testing in community pharmacies 2003-2021 using the Theoretical Domains Framework: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing is an evidence-based approach to finding effective medication therapies. While community pharmacists are ideally situated to provide PGx testing, the extent of its implementation is limited within community pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore trends in the international peer-reviewed primary literature on community pharmacists' implementation of PGx and map the main findings on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

METHODS

A literature search and 2-step screening were conducted per PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews. Inclusion criteria were English language, community pharmacy setting, full papers, and empirical research. Data were collated in a data extraction form. The main findings were deductively mapped on the TDF with a content analysis approach.

RESULTS

Of 1176 identified documents screened, 39 were included in this scoping review. Four groups of research were identified: pre-implementation surveys (interviews, and focus groups [56%, n = 22]); PGx implementation (single cohort to assess feasibility [38%, n = 15]); PGx implementation (controlled study to assess feasibility [n = 1, 2.5%]); and efficacy of PGx (2.5%, n = 1). Most studies throughout the 4 groups sought pharmacists' perceptions (46%, n = 18) and used the quantitative paradigm (77%, n = 30). TDF mapping documented positive beliefs about the benefits of PGx testing as a part of the pharmacists' role. Barriers to PGx use included pharmacists' awareness of knowledge gaps, low confidence in interpreting and communicating PGx results, concerns about cost, privacy, and integration into pharmacy workflow.

CONCLUSION

Research addressing PGx implementation within the community pharmacy evolved from assessing individuals' perceptions of PGx to determining the feasibility of PGx testing in pharmacies and evaluating the impact of PGx testing on patient outcomes in depression. Mapping the main findings on the TDF facilitates the development of multidimensional interventions, potentially targeting patients, pharmacists, and health policy.

Feasibility of Community Pharmacist-Initiated and Point-of-Care CYP2C19 Genotype-Guided De-Escalation of Oral P2Y12 Inhibitors

Tailoring antiplatelet therapy based on CYP2C19 pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing can improve cardiovascular outcomes and potentially reduce healthcare costs in patients on a P2Y12-inhibitor regime with prasugrel or ticagrelor. However, ubiquitous adoption—particularly in an outpatient setting—remains limited. We conducted a proof-of-concept study to evaluate the feasibility of CYP2C19-guided de-escalation of prasugrel/ticagrelor to clopidogrel through point-of-care (POC) PGx testing in the community pharmacy. Multiple feasibility outcomes were assessed. Overall, 144 patients underwent CYP2C19 PGx testing in 27 community pharmacies. Successful test results were obtained in 142 patients (98.6%). De-escalation to clopidogrel occurred in 19 patients (20%) out of 95 (67%) eligible for therapy de-escalation, which was mainly due to PGx testing not being included in cardiology guidelines. Out of the 119 patients (84%) and 14 pharmacists (100%) surveyed, 109 patients (92%) found the community pharmacy a suitable location for PGx testing, and the majority of pharmacists (86%) thought it has added value. Net costs due to PGx testing were estimated at €43 per patient, which could be reduced by earlier testing and could turn into savings if de-escalation would double to 40%. Although the observed de-escalation rate was low, POC CYP2C19-guided de-escalation to clopidogrel appears feasible in a community pharmacy setting.

Independent Community Pharmacists' Experience in Offering Pharmacogenetic Testing

Objective

This study assessed pharmacist experiences with delivering pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing in independent community pharmacies.

Methods

We conducted a cluster randomized trial of independent community pharmacies in North Carolina randomized to provide either PGx testing as a standalone service or integrated into medication therapy management (MTM) services. Surveys and pharmacist data about the delivery of PGx testing were collected. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted.

Results

A total of 36 pharmacists participated in the study from 22 pharmacies. Sixteen pharmacists completed the pre-study and post-study surveys, and four pharmacists completed the semi-structured interviews. Thirty-one percent (11/36) of pharmacists had had some education in personalized medicine or PGx prior to the study. The only outcome that differed by study arm was the use of educational resources, with significantly higher utilization in the PGx testing only arm (p=0.007). Overall, compared to the pre-study assessment, pharmacists' knowledge about PGx significantly improved post-study (p=0.018). In the post-study survey, almost all pharmacists indicated that they felt qualified/able to provide PGx testing at their pharmacy. While 75% of pharmacists indicated that they may continue to provide PGx testing at their pharmacy after the study, the major concerns were lack of reimbursement for PGx counseling and consultation given the necessary time required.

Conclusion

Our findings demonstrated a positive experience with delivering PGx testing in the community pharmacy setting with little difference in pharmacists' experiences in providing PGx testing with or without MTM. Pharmacists were confident in their ability to provide PGx testing and were interested in continuing to offer testing, though sustained delivery may be challenged by lack of prescribing provider engagement and reimbursement.

Delivery of Pharmacogenetic Testing with or without Medication Therapy Management in a Community Pharmacy Setting

Objective

The delivery of pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing has primarily been through clinical and hospital settings. We conducted a study to explore the feasibility of delivering PGx testing through community pharmacies, a less-studied setting.

Methods

We conducted a cluster randomized trial of community pharmacies in North Carolina through two approaches: the provision of PGx testing alone or PGx testing with medication therapy management (MTM).

Results

A total of 150 patient participants were enrolled at 17 pharmacies and reported high satisfaction with their testing experience. Participants in the PGx plus MTM arm were more likely to recall a higher number of results (p=0.04) and more likely to clearly understand their choices for prevention or early detection of side effects (p=0.01). A medication or dose change based on the PGx results was made for 8.7% of participants.

Conclusion

Limited differences were observed in the provision of PGx testing as a standalone test or combined with MTM. A limited number of treatment changes were made based on PGx test results. Patient acceptance of PGx testing offered through the community pharmacy was very high, but the addition of MTM did not impact patient-reported perceptions about PGx testing or medication adherence.

Pharmacogenomics in the United States Community Pharmacy Setting: The Clopidogrel-CYP2C19 Example

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) is expanding across health-care practice settings, including the community pharmacy. In the United States, models of implementation of PGx in the community pharmacy have described independent services and those layered on to medication therapy management. The drug-gene pair of clopidogrel-CYP2C19 has been a focus of implementation of PGx in community pharmacy and serves as an example of the evolution of the application of drug-gene interaction information to help optimize drug therapy. Expanded information related to this drug-gene pair has been provided by the US Food and Drug Administration and clinical PGx guidelines have and continue to be updated to support clinical decision-making. Most recently direct-to-consumer (DTC) PGx has resulted in patient generated sample collection and submission to a genetic testing-related company for analysis, with reporting of genotype and related phenotype information directly to the patient without a health-care professional guiding or even being involved in the process. The DTC testing approach needs to be considered in the development or modification of PGx service models in the community pharmacy setting. The example of clopidogrel-CYP2C19 is discussed and current models of PGx implementation in the community pharmacy in the United States are presented. New approaches to PGx services are offered as implementation continues to evolve and may now include DTC information.

How community pharmacists envision using pharmacogenomic data: A qualitative analysis

BACKGROUND

Nearly 300 medications contain pharmacogenomic information in their labeling approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. As this number continues to grow, community pharmacists will be called on to use available pharmacogenomic data at the point of dispensing.

OBJECTIVE

This qualitative study aimed to describe how pharmacists envision the integration of pharmacogenomic data into the current workflows of community pharmacy practice.

METHODS

Community pharmacists from a regional supermarket chain pharmacy in the greater Pittsburgh area were interviewed using a semistructured interview guide. Participating pharmacists were presented with 3 clinical scenarios, followed by questions, to gain insight into how they envisioned the integration of pharmacogenomic data into community pharmacy workflow. The interview transcriptions were transcribed and coded. The content was analyzed to deduce the final themes. Supporting quotes were selected to illustrate each theme.

RESULTS

Ten community pharmacists from 3 different pharmacy locations participated in the study. A thematic analysis produced 6 themes: (1) integrating pharmacogenomic data into the dispensing software, (2) receiving an alert for pharmacogenomic information within the dispensing software, (3) accessing pharmacogenomic clinical guidelines to guide drug-decision-making, (4) contacting the prescriber by adding a task to the call queue, (5) placing a mandatory counseling alert on medications that were adjusted using pharmacogenomic data, and (6) counseling the patient on the first refill of a medication that was adjusted using pharmacogenomic data.

CONCLUSION

This study describes how pharmacists envisioned the integration of pharmacogenomic data into community pharmacy workflow. The participants sought the integration of pharmacogenomic data into existing dispensing software, alerts for actionable prescribing changes using patient-specific pharmacogenomic data when available, and access to clinical decision support. In addition, the participants preferred to engage prescribers and receive alerts to counsel patients at prescription pick-up. These findings are key to integrating pharmacogenomic data into community pharmacy practice.

North Carolina's multi-institutional pharmacogenomics efforts with the North Carolina Precision Health Collaborative

The North Carolina Precision Health Collaborative is an interdisciplinary, public-private consortium of precision health experts who strategically align statewide resources and strengths to elevate precision health in the state and beyond. Pharmacogenomics (PGx) is a key area of focus for the North Carolina Precision Health Collaborative. Experts from Atrium Health's Levine Cancer Institute, Duke University/Duke Health System, Mission Health and the University of North Carolina (UNC) at Chapel Hill/UNC Health System have collaborated since 2017 to implement strategic PGx initiatives, including basic sciences research, translational research and clinical implementation of germline testing into practice and policy. This institutional profile highlights major PGx programs and initiatives across these organizations and how the collaborative is working together to advance PGx science and implementation.

Community pharmacy interventions for health promotion: effects on professional practice and health outcomes

BACKGROUND

Community pharmacies are an easily accessible and cost-effective platform for delivering health care worldwide, and the range of services provided has undergone rapid expansion in recent years. Thus, in addition to dispensing medication, pharmacy workers within community pharmacies now give advice on a range of health-promoting behaviours that aim to improve health and to optimise the management of long-term conditions. However, it remains uncertain whether these health-promotion interventions can change the professional practice of pharmacy workers, improve health behaviours and outcomes for pharmacy users and have the potential to address health inequalities.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of health-promotion interventions to change community pharmacy workers' professional practice and improve outcomes for users of community pharmacies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CENTRAL, six other databases and two trials registers to 6 February 2018. We also conducted reference checking, citation searches and contacted study authors to identify any additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised trials of health-promotion interventions in community pharmacies targeted at, or delivered by, pharmacy workers that aimed to improve the health-related behaviour of people attending the pharmacy compared to no treatment, or usual treatment received in the community pharmacy. We excluded interventions where there was no interaction between pharmacy workers and pharmacy users, and those that focused on medication use only.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard procedures recommended by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care review group for both data collection and analysis. We compared intervention to no intervention or to usual treatment using standardised mean differences (SMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) (higher scores represent better outcomes for pharmacy user health-related behaviour and quality of life, and lower scores represent better outcomes for clinical outcomes, costs and adverse events). Interpretation of effect sizes (SMD) was in line with Cochrane recommendations.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 57 randomised trials with 16,220 participants, described in 83 reports. Forty-nine studies were conducted in high-income countries, and eight in middle-income countries. We found no studies that had been conducted in low-income countries. Most interventions were educational, or incorporated skills training. Interventions were directed at pharmacy workers (n = 8), pharmacy users (n = 13), or both (n = 36). The clinical areas most frequently studied were diabetes, hypertension, asthma, and modification of cardiovascular risk. Duration of follow-up of interventions was often unclear. Only five studies gave details about the theoretical basis for the intervention, and studies did not provide sufficient data to comment on health inequalities. The most common sources of bias were lack of protection against contamination - mainly in individually randomised studies - and inadequate blinding of participants. The certainty of the evidence for all outcomes was moderate. We downgraded the certainty because of the heterogeneity across studies and evidence of potential publication bias. Professional practice outcomes We conducted a narrative analysis for pharmacy worker behaviour due to high heterogeneity in the results. Health-promotion interventions probably improve pharmacy workers' behaviour (2944 participants; 9 studies; moderate-certainty evidence) when compared to no intervention. These studies typically assessed behaviour using a simulated patient (mystery shopper) methodology. Pharmacy user outcomes Health-promotion interventions probably lead to a slight improvement in health-related behaviours of pharmacy users when compared to usual treatment (SMD 0.43, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.72; I² = 89%; 10 trials; 2138 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). These interventions probably also lead to a slight improvement in intermediate clinical outcomes, such as levels of cholesterol or glycated haemoglobin, for pharmacy users (SMD -0.43, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.21; I² = 90%; 20 trials; 3971 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We identified no studies that evaluated the impact of health-promotion interventions on event-based clinical outcomes, such as stroke or myocardial infarction, or the psychological well-being of pharmacy users. Health-promotion interventions probably lead to a slight improvement in quality of life for pharmacy users (SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.50; I²= 82%; 10 trials, 2687 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events No studies reported adverse events for either pharmacy workers or pharmacy users. Costs We found that health-promotion interventions are likely to be cost-effective, based on moderate-certainty evidence from five of seven studies that reported an economic evaluation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Health-promotion interventions in the community pharmacy context probably improve pharmacy workers' behaviour and probably have a slight beneficial effect on health-related behaviour, intermediate clinical outcomes, and quality of life for pharmacy users. Such interventions are likely to be cost-effective and the effects are seen across a range of clinical conditions and health-related behaviours. Nevertheless the magnitude of the effects varies between conditions, and more effective interventions might be developed if greater consideration were given to the theoretical basis of the intervention and mechanisms for effecting behaviour change.

Ready or not, here it comes: Direct-to-consumer pharmacogenomic testing and its implications for community pharmacists

OBJECTIVE

To explore the implications of direct-to-consumer pharmacogenomic testing for community pharmacy practice.

SUMMARY

In October 2018, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration provided approval for direct-to-consumer genetic testing company, 23andMe (Mountain View, CA), to return select pharmacogenomic test results to their customers. Given the community pharmacist's high accessibility to the public and in-depth knowledge of pharmacology, and the availability of direct-to-consumer genetic testing kits at pharmacies, it is likely that patients will present their pharmacogenomic test results to their pharmacists and expect them to incorporate those results into their care. It is important, therefore, that community pharmacists are aware of the clinical implications of these results, know where to turn for evidence-based clinical pharmacogenomics information, and be mindful of the need for confirmatory testing before changing therapy.

CONCLUSION

Community pharmacists are at the frontlines of health care, and as such will be at the frontlines of direct-to-consumer pharmacogenomic testing. In the near future, it is likely that community pharmacists will need to counsel patients on the interpretation and appropriate use of direct-to-consumer pharmacogenomic test results.

Community-Based Pharmacy Practice Innovation and the Role of the Community-Based Pharmacist Practitioner in the United States

Community-based pharmacy practice is evolving from a focus on product preparation and dispensing to becoming a health care destination within the four walls of the traditional community-based pharmacy. Furthermore, community-based pharmacy practice is expanding beyond the four walls of the traditional community-based pharmacy to provide care to patients where they need it. Pharmacists involved in this transition are community-based pharmacist practitioners who are primarily involved in leading and advancing team-based patient care services in communities to improve the patient health. This paper will review community-based pharmacy practice innovations and the role of the community-based pharmacist practitioner in the United States.

Community pharmacists' educational needs for implementing clinical pharmacogenomic services

OBJECTIVES

Pharmacist leadership and knowledge of pharmacogenomics is critical to the acceleration and enhancement of clinical pharmacogenomic services. This study aims for a qualitative description of community pharmacists' pharmacogenomic educational needs when implementing clinical pharmacogenomic services at community pharmacies.

METHODS

Pharmacists practicing at Rite Aid Pharmacy locations in the Greater Pittsburgh Area were recruited to participate in this qualitative analysis. Pharmacists from pharmacy locations offering pharmacogenomic testing and robust patient care services were eligible to participate in a semistructured, audio-recorded interview. The semistructured interview covered 4 domains crafted by the investigative team: (1) previous knowledge of pharmacogenomics; (2) implementation resources; (3) workflow adaptation; and (4) learning preferences. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and independently coded by 2 researchers. A thematic analysis by the investigative team followed. Supporting quotes were selected to illustrate each theme.

RESULTS

Eleven pharmacists from 9 unique pharmacy locations participated in this study. The average length of practice as a community pharmacist was 12 years (range, 1.5-31 years). Pharmacist's pharmacogenomic educational needs were categorized into 5 key themes: (1) enriched pharmacogenomic education and training; (2) active learning to build confidence in using pharmacogenomic data in practice; (3) robust and reputable clinical resources to effectively implement pharmacogenomic services; (4) team-based approach throughout implementation; (5) readily accessible network of pharmacogenomic experts.

CONCLUSION

This study describes the educational needs and preferences of community pharmacists for the successful provision of clinical pharmacogenomic services in community pharmacies. Pharmacists recognized their needs for enriched knowledge and instruction, practice applying pharmacogenomic principles with team-based approaches, robust clinical resources, and access to pharmacogenomic experts. This deeper understanding of pharmacist needs for pharmacogenomic education could help to accelerate and enhance the clinical implementation of pharmacogenomic services led by community pharmacists.

Interpretation of the effect of CYP2C9, VKORC1 and CYP4F2 variants on warfarin dosing adjustment in Turkey

It was aimed to underline the importance and explain the meaning of genetic testing in warfarin dosing and investigate and evaluate the contributions of the CYP2C9, VKORC1, and CYP4F2 variants in a Turkish population. Two hundred patients were genotyped for CYP2C9 (rs1799853, rs1057910 and rs56165452), VKORC1 (rs9934438, rs8050894, rs9923231, rs7294 and rs2359612) and CYP4F2 (rs2108622), yet, only 127 patients were found suitable for further evaluation in terms of their personal response to warfarin due to long term usage and available INR and dose usage information. The DNA sequences were determined by the ABI PRISM 3100 Genetic Analyzer to 3130xl System (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, California). Warfarin dose application suggestions by warfaringdosing.org, FDA and MayoClinic were followed. Dose requirements in the Turkish population were found higher than the suggested doses by warfarindosing.org. The multivariate logistic regression analysis reveals the utilization of VCORC1 genetic evaluation is valuable in warfarin dosing (low and moderate vs. high) in this study (p < 0.001). The present study provides findings for clinicians to adapt the genetic data to the daily practice. We observed that the VKORC1 variant showed a more potent impact in warfarin dosing in this study.