A stepwise approach to implementing pharmacogenetic testing in the primary care setting

Pharmacists' role in supporting the return of over 10,000 preemptive pharmacogenomics results: The Mayo Clinic experience

PURPOSE

To develop a pharmacist-driven, exploratory pharmacogenomics implementation model with the goal of creating a process for pharmacists to interpret pharmacogenomics results from RIGHT 10K Study samples and provide electronic consults to providers.

SUMMARY

A train-the-trainer model program was initiated whereby pharmacogenomics pharmacists developed a documentation template and a quick reference guide as a standard guide to train other pharmacists. Pharmacists completed electronic consults (e-consults) reviewing pharmacogenomics results, with reference to drug-gene interactions, for patients with "semi-urgent" and "clinically actionable" results, defined as those indicating a potential for gene-drug interactions to cause major harm and those indicating a potential for an adverse drug reaction or reduced efficacy, respectively. Outcomes measured included the number of consults over time, number and role of pharmacists involved, average time to complete e-consults over time, and gene-drug pairs for semi-urgent consults per month. A total of 395 pharmacists were trained. The total number of e-consults completed was 2,843: 61 semi-urgent and 2,782 clinically actionable consults. The average time spent per consult was 24 minutes, and the average number of e-consults per pharmacist was 7. CYP2C19-clopidogrel was the most common gene-drug pair targeted in semi-urgent consults.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacy leaders planning to implement similar pharmacogenomics programs can utilize this data to estimate hiring needs for future pharmacogenomics implementation, while also considering the potential additional cost of developing resources.

Current published evidence on barriers and proposed strategies for genetic testing implementation in health care settings: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The slow uptake of genetic testing in routine clinical practice warrants the attention of researchers and practitioners to find effective strategies to facilitate implementation.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to identify the barriers to and strategies for pharmacogenetic testing implementation in a health care setting from published literature.

METHODS

A scoping review was conducted in August 2021 with an expanded literature search using Ovid MEDLINE, Web of Science, International Pharmaceutical Abstract, and Google Scholar to identify studies reporting implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in a health care setting, from a health care system's perspective. Articles were screened using DistillerSR and findings were organized using the 5 major domains of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR).

RESULTS

A total of 3536 unique articles were retrieved from the above sources, with only 253 articles retained after title and abstract screening. Upon screening the full texts, 57 articles (representing 46 unique practice sites) were found matching the inclusion criteria. We found that most reported barriers and their associated strategies to the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing surrounded 2 CFIR domains: intervention characteristics and inner settings. Factors relating to cost and reimbursement were described as major barriers in the intervention characteristics. In the same domain, another major barrier was the lack of utility studies to provide evidence for genetic testing uptake. Technical hurdles, such as integrating genetic information to medical records, were identified as an inner settings barrier. Collaborations and lessons from early implementers could be useful strategies to overcome majority of the barriers across different health care settings. Strategies proposed by the included implementation studies to overcome these barriers are summarized and can be used as guidance in future.

CONCLUSION

Barriers and strategies identified in this scoping review can provide implementation guidance for practice sites that are interested in implementing genetic testing.

Pharmacogenomics in practice: a review and implementation guide

Considerable efforts have been exerted to implement Pharmacogenomics (PGx), the study of interindividual variations in DNA sequence related to drug response, into routine clinical practice. In this article, we first briefly describe PGx and its role in improving treatment outcomes. We then propose an approach to initiate clinical PGx in the hospital setting. One should first evaluate the available PGx evidence, review the most relevant drugs, and narrow down to the most actionable drug-gene pairs and related variant alleles. This is done based on data curated and evaluated by experts such as the pharmacogenomics knowledge implementation (PharmGKB) and the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC), as well as drug regulatory authorities such as the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicinal Agency (EMA). The next step is to differentiate reactive point of care from preemptive testing and decide on the genotyping strategy being a candidate or panel testing, each of which has its pros and cons, then work out the best way to interpret and report PGx test results with the option of integration into electronic health records and clinical decision support systems. After test authorization or testing requirements by the government or drug regulators, putting the plan into action involves several stakeholders, with the hospital leadership supporting the process and communicating with payers, the pharmacy and therapeutics committee leading the process in collaboration with the hospital laboratory and information technology department, and healthcare providers (HCPs) ordering the test, understanding the results, making the appropriate therapeutic decisions, and explaining them to the patient. We conclude by recommending some strategies to further advance the implementation of PGx in practice, such as the need to educate HCPs and patients, and to push for more tests' reimbursement. We also guide the reader to available PGx resources and examples of PGx implementation programs and initiatives.

All of Us and the Promise of Precision Medicine: Achieving Equitable Access for Federally Qualified Health Center Patients

The United States National Institutes of Health's (NIH) All of Us (AoU) initiative recruits participants from diverse backgrounds to improve the makeup of biobanks, considering nearly all biospecimens used in research come from people of European ancestry. Participants who join AoU consent to provide samples of blood, urine, and/or saliva and to submit their electronic health record to the program. In addition to diversifying precision medicine research studies, AoU will return genetic results back to many participants, which may require further follow-up care (i.e., more frequent cancer screening or mastectomy after a BRCA result). To help achieve its goals, AoU has partnered with Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), which is a type of community health center whose patient base is comprised largely of people who are uninsured, underinsured, or on Medicaid. Our NIH-funded study convened FQHC providers involved in AoU to better understand precision medicine in community health settings. Drawing from our findings, we present barriers community health patients and their providers face when accessing diagnostics and specialty care after genetic results necessitate medical follow-up care. We also propose several policy and financial recommendations to help overcome the challenges discussed, stemming from a commitment to equitable access to precision medicine advances.

Identifying the prevalence of clinically actionable drug-gene interactions in a health system biorepository to guide pharmacogenetics implementation services

Understanding patterns of drug-gene interactions (DGIs) is important for advancing the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics (PGx) into routine practice. Prior studies have estimated the prevalence of DGIs, but few have confirmed DGIs in patients with known genotypes and prescriptions, nor have they evaluated clinician characteristics associated with DGI-prescribing. This retrospective chart review assessed prevalence of DGI, defined as a medication prescription in a patient with a PGx phenotype that has a clinical practice guideline recommendation to adjust therapy or monitor drug response, for patients enrolled in a research genetic biorepository linked to electronic health records (EHRs). The prevalence of prescriptions for medications with pharmacogenetic (PGx) guidelines, proportion of prescriptions with DGI, location of DGI prescription, and clinical service of the prescriber were evaluated descriptively. Seventy-five percent (57,058/75,337) of patients had a prescription for a medication with a PGx guideline. Up to 60% (n = 26,067/43,647) of patients had at least one DGI when considering recommendations to adjust or monitor therapy based on genotype. The majority (61%) of DGIs occurred in outpatient prescriptions. Proton pump inhibitors were the most common DGI medication for 11 of 12 clinical services. Almost 25% of patients (n = 10,706/43,647) had more than one unique DGI, and, among this group of patients, 61% had a DGI with more than one gene. These findings can inform future clinical implementation by identifying key stakeholders for initial DGI prescriptions, helping to inform workflows. The high prevalence of multigene interactions identified also support the use of panel PGx testing as an implementation strategy.

How to Implement a Pharmacogenetics Service at your Institution

The vast majority of patients possess one or more pharmacogenetic variants that can influence optimal medication use. When pharmacogenetic data are used to guide drug choice and dosing, evidence points to improved disease outcomes, fewer adverse effects, and lower healthcare spending. Although its science is well established, clinical use of pharmacogenetic data to guide drug therapy is still in its infancy. Pharmacogenetics essentially involves the intersection of an individual's genetic data with their medications, which makes pharmacists uniquely qualified to provide clinical support and education in this field. In fact, most pharmacogenetics implementations, to date, have been led by pharmacists as leaders or members of a multidisciplinary team or as individual practitioners. A successful large-scale pharmacogenetics implementation requires coordination and synergy among administrators, clinicians, informatics teams, laboratories, and patients. Because clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics is in its early stages, there is an urgent need for guidance and dissemination of shared experiences to provide a framework for clinicians. Many early adopters of pharmacogenetics have explored various strategies among diverse practice settings. This article relies on the experiences of early adopters to provide guidance for critical steps along the pathway to implementation, including strategies to engage stakeholders; evaluate pharmacogenetic evidence; coordinate laboratory testing, results interpretation and their integration into the electronic health record; identify reimbursement avenues; educate providers and patients; and maintain a successful program. Learning from early adopters' published experiences and strategies can allow clinicians leading a new pharmacogenetics implementation to avoid pitfalls and adapt and apply lessons learned by others to their own practice.

CYP2D6 pharmacogenetics and phenoconversion in personalized medicine

INTRODUCTION

CYP2D6 contributes to the metabolism of approximately 20-25% of drugs. However, CYP2D6 is highly polymorphic and different alleles can lead to impacts ranging from null to increase in activity. Moreover, there are commonly used drugs that potently inhibit the CYP2D6, thus causing 'phenoconversion' which can convert the genotypic normal metabolizer into phenotypic poor metabolizer. Despite growing literature on the clinical implications of non-normal CYP2D6 genotype and phenoconversion on patient-related outcomes, implementation of CYP2D6 pharmacogenetics and phenoconversion to guide prescribing is rare. This review focuses on providing the clinical importance of CYP2D6 pharmacogenetics and phenoconversion in precision medicine and summarizes the challenges and approaches to implement these into clinical practice.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search was performed using PubMed and clinical studies documenting the effects of CYP2D6 genotypes and/or CYP2D6 inhibitors on pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics or treatment outcomes of CYP2D6-metabolized drugs, and studies on implementation challenges and approaches.

EXPERT OPINION

Considering the extent and impact of genetic polymorphisms of CYP2D6, phenoconversion by the comedications, and contribution of CYP2D6 in drug metabolism, CYP2D6 pharmacogenetics is essential to ensure drug safety and efficacy. Utilization of proper guidelines incorporating both CYP2D6 pharmacogenetics and phenoconversion in clinical care assists in optimizing drug therapy.

Clinical Implementation of DPYD Pharmacogenetic Testing to Prevent Early-Onset Fluoropyrimidine-Related Toxicity in Cancer Patients in Switzerland

The implementation of pharmacogenetic testing into clinical practice has been a slow process so far. Here, we review the implementation of pre-treatment testing of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) risk variants to prevent early-onset fluoropyrimidine (FP)-related toxicity in cancer patients in Switzerland based on data of a large Swiss diagnostic center. In January 2017, the Swiss Federal Office of Public Health introduced the reimbursement of DPYD testing by the compulsory health insurance in Switzerland based on evidence for the clinical relevance of DPYD-risk variants and the cost-effectiveness of pre-treatment testing, and on the availability of international guidelines. However, we did not observe a strong increase in DPYD testing at our diagnostic center from 2017 to 2019. Only a low number of DPYD-testing requests (28-42 per year), concerning mostly retrospective investigations of suspected FP-toxicity, were received. In contrast, we observed a 14-fold increase in DPYD testing together with a strong shift from retrospective to pre-treatment test requests upon the release of recommendations for DPYD testing prior to FP-treatment in April 2020 by the European Medicines Agency. This increase was mainly driven by three geographic regions of Switzerland, where partner institutions of previous research collaborations regarding FP-related toxicity are located and who acted as early-adopting institutions of DPYD testing. Our data suggest the important role of early adopters as accelerators of clinical implementation of pharmacogenetic testing by introducing these policies to their working environment and educating health workers from their own and nearby institutions.

Structured approaches to implementation of clinical genomics: A scoping review

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the extent to which structured approaches to implementation of clinical genomics, proposed or adapted, are informed by evidence.

METHODS

A systematic approach was used to identify peer-reviewed articles and gray literature to report on 4 research questions: 1. What structured approaches have been proposed to support implementation? 2. To what extent are the structured approaches informed by evidence? 3. How have structured approaches been deployed in the genomic setting? 4. What are the intended outcomes of the structured approaches?

RESULTS

A total of 30 unique structured approaches to implementation were reported across 23 peer-reviewed publications and 11 gray literature articles. Most approaches were process models, applied in the preadoption implementation phase, focusing on a "service" outcome. Key findings included a lack of implementation science theory informing the development/implementation of newly designed structured approaches in the genomic setting and a lack of measures to assess implementation effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

This scoping review identified a significant number of structured approaches developed to inform the implementation of genomic medicine into clinical practice, with limited use of implementation science to support the process. We recommend the use of existing implementation science theory and the expertise of implementation scientists to inform the design of genomic programs being implemented into clinical care.

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.

Prioritizing pharmacogenomics implementation initiates: a survey of healthcare professionals

Aim: Characterize current perceptions, practices, preferences and barriers to integrating pharmacogenomics into patient care at an institution with an established pharmacogenomics clinic. Materials & methods: A 16-item anonymous survey was sent to healthcare professionals practicing at Tampa General Hospital and the University of South Florida Health. Results: Survey participants consisted of nine advanced practice providers, 41 pharmacists and 64 physicians. Majority of survey participants did not feel confident in their ability to interpret and apply pharmacogenomic results. In the past 12 months, 27% of physicians reported ordering a pharmacogenomic test. The greatest reported barrier to integrating pharmacogenomics was the absence of established guidelines or protocols. Conclusion: Most clinicians believed pharmacogenomics would be useful in their clinical practice but do not feel prepared to interpret pharmacogenomic results.

Lay understandings of drug-gene interactions: The right medication, the right dose, at the right time, but what are the right words?

As pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing increases in popularity, lay concepts of drug‐gene interactions set the stage for shared decision making in precision medicine. Few studies explore what recipients of PGx results think is happening in their bodies when a drug‐gene interaction is discovered. To characterize biobank participants’ understanding of PGx research results, we conducted a focus group study, which took place after PGx variants conferring increased risk of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency were disclosed to biobank contributors. DPD deficiency confers an increased risk of adverse reaction to commonly used cancer chemotherapeutics. Ten focus groups were conducted, ranging from two to eight participants. Fifty‐four individuals participated in focus groups. A framework approach was used for descriptive and explanatory analysis. Descriptive themes included participants’ efforts to make sense of PGx findings as they related to: (1) health implications, (2) drugs, and (3) genetics. Explanatory analysis supplied a functional framework of how participant word choices can perform different purposes in PGx communication. Results bear three main implications for PGx research‐related disclosure. First, participants’ use of various terms suggest participants generally understanding their PGx results, including how positive PGx results differ from positive disease susceptibility genetic results. Second, PGx disclosure in biobanking can involve participant conflation of drug‐gene interactions with allergies or other types of medical reactions. Third, the functional framework suggests a need to move beyond a deficit model of genetic literacy in PGx communication. Together, findings provide an initial evidence base for supporting bidirectional expert‐recipient PGx results communication.

Underrepresented patient views and perceptions of personalized medication treatment through pharmacogenomics

Within an institutional pharmacogenomics implementation program, we surveyed 463 outpatients completing preemptive pharmacogenomic testing whose genetic results were available to providers for guiding medication treatment. We compared views and experiences from self-reported White and Black patients, including education level as a covariate across analyses. Black patients were less confident about whether their providers made personalized treatment decisions, and overwhelmingly wanted a greater role for their genetic information in clinical care. Both groups similarly reported that providers asked their opinions regarding medication changes, but White patients were more likely (59% vs. 49%, P = 0.005) to discuss the impact of personal/genetic makeup on medication response with providers, and Black patients reported initiating such discussions much less frequently (4% vs. 15%, P = 0.037). Opportunities exist for enhanced communication with underrepresented patients around personalized care. Tailored communication strategies and development of support tools employed in diverse healthcare settings may facilitate pharmacogenomically guided medication treatment that equitably benefits minority patient populations.

A Comprehensive Review of HLA and Severe Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions: Implication for Clinical Pharmacogenomics and Precision Medicine

Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) encoded by the HLA gene is an important modulator for immune responses and drug hypersensitivity reactions as well. Genetic polymorphisms of HLA vary widely at population level and are responsible for developing severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions (SCARs) such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), maculopapular exanthema (MPE). The associations of different HLA alleles with the risk of drug induced SJS/TEN, DRESS and MPE are strongly supportive for clinical considerations. Prescribing guidelines generated by different national and international working groups for translation of HLA pharmacogenetics into clinical practice are underway and functional in many countries, including Thailand. Cutting edge genomic technologies may accelerate wider adoption of HLA screening in routine clinical settings. There are great opportunities and several challenges as well for effective implementation of HLA genotyping globally in routine clinical practice for the prevention of drug induced SCARs substantially, enforcing precision medicine initiatives.

Pharmacogenomic testing to support prescribing in primary care: a structured review of implementation models

The application of pharmacogenomics could meaningfully contribute toward medicines optimization within primary care. This review identified 13 studies describing eight implementation models utilizing a multi-gene pharmacogenomic panel within a primary care or community setting. These were small feasibility studies (n <200). They demonstrated importance and feasibility of pre-test counseling, the role of the pharmacist, data integration into the electronic medical record and point-of-care clinical decision support systems (CDSS). Findings were considered alongside existing primary care prescribing practices and implementation frameworks to demonstrate how issues may be addressed by existing nationalized healthcare and primary care infrastructure. Development of point-of-care CDSS should be prioritized; establishing clinical leadership, education programs, defining practitioner roles and responsibilities and addressing commissioning issues will also be crucial.

Creation of a pharmacogenomics patient portal complementary to an existing institutional provider-facing clinical decision support system

BACKGROUND

Applied pharmacogenomics presents opportunities for improving patient care through precision medicine, particularly when paired with appropriate clinical decision support (CDS). However, a lack of patient resources for understanding pharmacogenomic test results may hinder shared decision-making and patient confidence in treatment. We sought to create a patient pharmacogenomics education and results delivery platform complementary to a CDS system to facilitate further research on the relevance of patient education to pharmacogenomics.

METHODS

We conceptualized a model that extended the data access layer of an existing institutional CDS tool to allow for the pairing of decision supports offered to providers with patient-oriented summaries at the same level of phenotypic specificity. We built a two-part system consisting of a secure portal for patient use and an administrative dashboard for patient summary creation. The system was built in an ASP.NET and AngularJS architecture, and all data was housed in a HIPAA-compliant data center, with PHI secure in transit and at rest.

RESULTS

The YourPGx Patient Portal was deployed on the institutional network in June 2019. Fifty-eight unique patient portal summaries have been written so far, which can provide over 4500 results modules to the pilot population of 544 patients. Patient behavior on the portal is being logged for further research.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first automated system designed and deployed to provide detailed, personalized patient pharmacogenomics education complementary to a clinical decision support system. Future work will expand upon this system to allow for telemedicine and patient notification of new or updated results.

Pharmacogenomics research and its clinical implementation in Thailand: Lessons learned from the resource-limited settings

Several barriers present challenges to implementing pharmacogenomics into practice. This review will provide an overview of the current pharmacogenomics practices and research in Thailand, address the challenges and lessons learned from delivering clinical pharmacogenomic services in Thailand, emphasize the pharmacogenomics implementation issues that must be overcome, and identify current pharmacogenomic initiatives and plans to facilitate clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics in Thailand. Ever since the pharmacogenomics research began in 2004 in Thailand, a multitude of pharmacogenomics variants associated with drug responses have been identified in the Thai population, such as HLA-B∗15:02 for carbamazepine and oxcarbazepine, HLA-B∗58:01 for allopurinol, HLA-B∗13:01 for dapsone and cotrimoxazole, CYP2B6 variants for efavirenz, CYP2C9∗3 for phenytoin and warfarin, CYP3A5∗3 for tacrolimus, and UGT1A1∗6 and UGT1A1∗28 for irinotecan, etc. The future of pharmacogenomics guided therapy in clinical settings across Thailand appears promising because of the availability of evidence of clinical validity of the pharmacogenomics testing and support for reimbursement of pharmacogenomics testing.

Strategies and settings of clinical pharmacogenetic implementation: a scoping review of pharmacogenetics programs

Pharmacogenetic (PGx) literature has shown beneficial outcomes in safety, efficacy and cost when evidence-based gene-drug decision making is incorporated into clinical practice. PGx programs with successfully implemented clinical services have been published in a variety of settings including academic health centers and community practice. The primary objective was to systematically scope the literature to characterize the current trends, extent, range and nature of clinical PGx programs. Forty articles representing 19 clinical PGx programs were included in analysis. Most programs are in urban, academic institutions. Education, governance and workflow were commonly described while billing/reimbursement and consent were not. This review provides an overview of current PGx models that can be used as a reference for institutions beginning the implementation process.

Implementation of a pharmacist-provided pharmacogenomics service in an executive health program

PURPOSE

We describe the implementation of a pharmacist-provided pharmacogenomics (PGx) service in an executive health program (EHP) at an academic medical center.

SUMMARY

As interest in genomic testing grows, pharmacists have the opportunity to advance the use of PGx in EHPs, in collaboration with other healthcare professionals. In November 2018, a pharmacist-provided PGx service was established in the EHP at the University of Colorado Hospital. The team members included 3 physicians, a pharmacist trained in PGx, a registered dietitian/exercise physiologist, a nurse, and 2 medical assistants. We conducted 4 preimplementation steps: (1) assessment of the patient population, (2) selection of a PGx test, (3) establishment of a visit structure, and (4) selection of a billing model. The PGx consultations involved two 1-hour visits. The first visit encompassed pretest PGx education, review of the patient's current medications and previous medication intolerances, and DNA sample collection for genotyping. After this visit, the pharmacist developed a therapeutic plan based on the PGx test results, discussed the results and plan with the physician, and created a personalized PGx report. At the second visit, the pharmacist reviewed the PGx test results, personalized the PGx report, and discussed the PGx-guided therapeutic plan with the patient. Overall, the strategy worked well; minor challenges included evaluation of gene-drug pairs with limited PGx evidence, communication of information to non-EHP providers, scheduling issues, and reimbursement.

CONCLUSION

The addition of a PGx service within an EHP was feasible and provided pharmacists the opportunity to lead PGx efforts and collaborate with physicians to expand the precision medicine footprint at an academic medical center.

Design and Early Implementation Successes and Challenges of a Pharmacogenetics Consult Clinic

Pharmacogenetic testing (PGT) is increasingly being used as a tool to guide clinical decisions. This article describes the development of an outpatient, pharmacist-led, pharmacogenetics consult clinic within internal medicine, its workflow, and early results, along with successes and challenges. A pharmacogenetics-trained pharmacist encouraged primary care physicians (PCPs) to refer patients who were experiencing side effects/ineffectiveness from certain antidepressants, opioids, and/or proton pump inhibitors. In clinic, the pharmacist confirmed the need for and ordered CYP2C19 and/or CYP2D6 testing, provided evidence-based pharmacogenetic recommendations to PCPs, and educated PCPs and patients on the results. Operational and clinical metrics were analyzed. In two years, 91 referred patients were seen in clinic (mean age 57, 67% women, 91% European-American). Of patients who received PGT, 77% had at least one CYP2C19 and/or CYP2D6 phenotype that would make conventional prescribing unfavorable. Recommendations suggested that physicians change a medication/dose for 59% of patients; excluding two patients lost to follow-up, 87% of recommendations were accepted. Challenges included PGT reimbursement and referral maintenance. High frequency of actionable results suggests physician education on who to refer was successful and illustrates the potential to reduce trial-and-error prescribing. High recommendation acceptance rate demonstrates the pharmacist's effectiveness in providing genotype-guided recommendations, emphasizing a successful pharmacist-physician collaboration.

How to Transition from Single-Gene Pharmacogenetic Testing to Preemptive Panel-Based Testing: A Tutorial

There have been significant advancements in precision medicine and approaches to medication selection based on pharmacogenetic results. With the availability of direct-to-consumer genetic testing and growing awareness of genetic interindividual variability, patient demand for more precise, individually tailored drug regimens is increasing. The University of Florida (UF) Health Precision Medicine Program (PMP) was established in 2011 to improve integration of genomic data into clinical practice. In the ensuing years, the UF Health PMP has successfully implemented several single-gene tests to optimize the precision of medication prescribing across a variety of clinical settings. Most recently, the UF Health PMP launched a custom-designed pharmacogenetic panel, including pharmacogenes relevant to supportive care medications commonly prescribed to patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment, referred to as "GatorPGx." This tutorial provides guidance and information to institutions on how to transition from the implementation of single-gene pharmacogenetic testing to a preemptive panel-based testing approach. Here, we demonstrate application of the preemptive panel in the setting of an adult solid tumor oncology clinic. Importantly, the information included herein can be applied to other clinical practice settings.