Understanding the barriers and enablers of pharmacogenomic testing in primary care: a qualitative systematic review with meta-aggregation synthesis

Pharmacogenetic testing in primary care could bolster depression treatment: A value proposition

Pharmacogenetic testing could reduce the time to identify a safe and effective medication for depression; however, it is underutilized in practice. Major depression constitutes the most common mental disorder in the US, and while antidepressant therapy can help, the current trial -and error approach can require patients to endure multiple medication trials before finding one that is effective. Tailoring the fit of pharmacogenetic testing with prescribers' needs across a variety of settings could help to establish a generalizable value proposition to improve likelihood of adoption. We conducted a study to explore the value proposition for health systems using pharmacogenetic testing for mental health medications through prescribers' real-world experiences using implementation science concepts and systematic interviews with prescribers and administrators from four health care systems. To identify a value proposition, we organized the themes according to the Triple Aim framework, a leading framework for health care policy which asserts that high-value care should focus on three key metrics: (1) better health care quality and (2) population-level outcomes with (3) reduced per capita costs. Primary care providers whom we interviewed said that they value pharmacogenetic testing because it would provide more information about medications that they can prescribe, expanding their ability to identify medications that best-fit patients and reducing their reliance on referrals to specialists; they said that this capacity would help meet patients' needs for access to mental health care through primary care. At the same time, prescribers expressed differing views about how pharmacogenetic testing can help with quality of care and whether their views about out-of-pocket cost would prevent them from offering it. Thus, implementation should focus on integrating pharmacogenetic testing into primary care and using strategies to support prescribers' interactions with patients.

Paving the path for implementation of clinical genomic sequencing globally: Are we ready?

Despite the emerging evidence in recent years, successful implementation of clinical genomic sequencing (CGS) remains limited and is challenged by a range of barriers. These include a lack of standardized practices, limited economic assessments for specific indications, limited meaningful patient engagement in health policy decision-making, and the associated costs and resource demand for implementation. Although CGS is gradually becoming more available and accessible worldwide, large variations and disparities remain, and reflections on the lessons learned for successful implementation are sparse. In this commentary, members of the Global Economics and Evaluation of Clinical Genomics Sequencing Working Group (GEECS) describe the global landscape of CGS in the context of health economics and policy and propose evidence-based solutions to address existing and future barriers to CGS implementation. The topics discussed are reflected as two overarching themes: (1) system readiness for CGS and (2) evidence, assessments, and approval processes. These themes highlight the need for health economics, public health, and infrastructure and operational considerations; a robust patient- and family-centered evidence base on CGS outcomes; and a comprehensive, collaborative, interdisciplinary approach.

Advanced practice nurse pharmacogenomics capacity and utilization

BACKGROUND

Guided by Clinical Pharmacogenomic Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for >140 medications, pharmacogenomic tests inform medication selection and dosing to optimize efficacy while minimizing toxicities.

PURPOSE

This study assessed pharmacogenomic self-reported curricular content, knowledge, skills, attitudes, and usage in advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) with prescriptive privileges.

METHODOLOGY

An online survey was administered assessing pharmacogenomic curricular content, knowledge, skills, attitudes, and usage.

RESULTS

Data from 266 APRNs were analyzed. Most graduated with their highest nursing degree ∼10 years ago and reported pharmacogenomic curricular content (n = 124, 48%). Pharmacogenomic curricular content was associated with pharmacogenomic familiarity (p = .045) but not with knowledge confidence (p = .615). Pharmacogenomic usage, defined as ordering a pharmacogenomic test within the past year, was low (n = 76, 29%) and most (n = 210, 84%) reported never using CPIC Guidelines. Advanced practice registered nurses (n = 162) who did not anticipate ordering a pharmacogenomic test in the next year (n = 77, 48%) indicated that they did not know what test to order.

CONCLUSIONS

Deficits were identified in APRN pharmacogenomic knowledge and skills despite academic training. Most reported not ordering pharmacogenomic tests, did not know what test to order, and did not use CPIC guidelines.

IMPLICATIONS

Pharmacogenomics is a quality and safety issue. Academic training did not result in practice integration and most reported capacity deficits. Recommendation for overcoming academic deficits include: (1) assessment of pharmacogenomics curricular content and faculty teaching capacity; (2) training addressing identified deficiencies; and (3) Commission of Collegiate Nursing Education policies that include pharmacogenomics in advanced pharmacology. Practicing APRN plans include on-the-job training and/or mandatory training at the time of relicensure.

Next-generation sequencing in pharmacogenomics - fit for clinical decision support?

INTRODUCTION

The technological advances of sequencing methods during the past 20 years have fuelled the generation of large amounts of sequencing data that comprise common variations, as well as millions of rare and personal variants that would not be identified by conventional genotyping. While comprehensive sequencing is technically feasible, its clinical utility for guiding personalized treatment decisions remains controversial.

AREAS COVERED

We discuss the opportunities and challenges of comprehensive sequencing compared to targeted genotyping for pharmacogenomic applications. Current pharmacogenomic sequencing panels are heterogeneous and clinical actionability of the included genes is not a major focus. We provide a current overview and critical discussion of how current studies utilize sequencing data either retrospectively from biobanks, databases or repurposed diagnostic sequencing, or prospectively using pharmacogenomic sequencing.

EXPERT OPINION

While sequencing-based pharmacogenomics has provided important insights into genetic variations underlying the safety and efficacy of a multitude pharmacological treatments, important hurdles for the clinical implementation of pharmacogenomic sequencing remain. We identify gaps in the interpretation of pharmacogenetic variants, technical challenges pertaining to complex loci and variant phasing, as well as unclear cost-effectiveness and incomplete reimbursement. It is critical to address these challenges in order to realize the promising prospects of pharmacogenomic sequencing.

Evolution of pharmacogenomic services and implementation of a multi-state pharmacogenomics clinic across a large rural healthcare system

Introduction: Pharmacogenomics (PGx) aims to maximize drug benefits while minimizing risk of toxicity. Although PGx has proven beneficial in many settings, clinical uptake lags. Lack of clinician confidence and limited availability of PGx testing can deter patients from completing PGx testing. A few novel PGx clinic models have been described as a way to incorporate PGx testing into the standard of care. Background: A PGx clinic was implemented to fill an identified gap in provider availability, confidence, and utilization of PGx across our health system. Through a joint pharmacist and Advanced Practice Provider (APP) collaborative clinic, patients received counseling and PGx medication recommendations both before and after PGx testing. The clinic serves patients both in-person and virtually across four states in the upper Midwest. Results: The majority of patients seen in the PGx clinic during the early months were clinician referred (77%, n = 102) with the remainder being self-referred. Patients were, on average, taking two medications with Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines. Visits were split almost equally between in-person and virtual visits. Conclusion: Herein, we describe the successful implementation of an interdisciplinary PGx clinic to further enhance our PGx program. Throughout the implementation of the PGx clinic we have learned valuable lessons that may be of interest to other implementors. Clinicians were actively engaged in clinic referrals and early adoption of telemedicine was key to the clinic's early successes.

British South Asian ancestry participants views of pharmacogenomics clinical implementation and research: a thematic analysis

BACKGROUND

South Asian ancestry populations are underrepresented in genomic studies and therapeutics trials. British South Asians suffer from multi-morbidity leading to polypharmacy. Our objective was to elucidate British South Asian ancestry community perspectives on pharmacogenomic implementation and sharing pharmacogenomic clinical data for research.

METHODS

Four focus groups were conducted (9-12 participants in each). Two groups were mixed gender, while one group was male only and one was female only. Simultaneous interpretation was available to participants in Urdu and Bengali. Focus groups were recorded and abridged transcription and thematic analysis were undertaken.

RESULTS

There were 42 participants, 64% female. 26% were born in the UK or Europe. 52% were born in Bangladesh and 17% in Pakistan. 36% reported university level education. Implementation of pharmacogenomics was perceived to be beneficial to individuals but pose a risk of overburdening resource limited systems. Pharmacogenomic research was perceived to be beneficial to the community, with concerns about data privacy and misuse. Data sharing was desirable if the researchers did not have a financial stake, and benefits would be shared. Trust was the key condition for the acceptability of both clinical implementation and research. Trust was linked with medication compliance. Education, outreach, and communication facilitate trust.

CONCLUSIONS (SIGNIFICANCE AND IMPACT OF THE STUDY)

Pharmacogenomics implementation with appropriate education and communication has the potential to enhance trust and contribute to increased medication compliance. Trust drives data sharing, which would enable enhanced representation in research. Representation in scientific evidence base could cyclically enhance trust and compliance.

Pharmacogenomics and health disparities, are we helping?

Pharmacogenomics has been at the forefront of precision medicine during the last few decades. Precision medicine carries the potential of improving health outcomes at both the individual as well as population levels. To harness the benefits of its initiatives, careful dissection of existing health disparities as they relate to precision medicine is of paramount importance. Attempting to address the existing disparities at the early stages of design and implementation of these efforts is the only guarantee of a successful just outcome. In this review, we glance at a few determinants of existing health disparities as they intersect with pharmacogenomics research and implementation. In our opinion, highlighting these disparities is imperative for the purpose of researching meaningful solutions. Failing to identify, and hence address, these disparities in the context of the current and future precision medicine initiatives would leave an already strained health system, even more inundated with inequality.

A Theory-Informed Systematic Review of Barriers and Enablers to Implementing Multi-Drug Pharmacogenomic Testing

PGx testing requires a complex set of activities undertaken by practitioners and patients, resulting in varying implementation success. This systematic review aimed (PROSPERO: CRD42019150940) to identify barriers and enablers to practitioners and patients implementing pharmacogenomic testing. We followed PRISMA guidelines to conduct and report this review. Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed Central were systematically searched from inception to June 2022. The theoretical domain framework (TDF) guided the organisation and reporting of barriers or enablers relating to pharmacogenomic testing activities. From the twenty-five eligible reports, eleven activities were described relating to four implementation stages: ordering, facilitating, interpreting, and applying pharmacogenomic testing. Four themes were identified across the implementation stages: IT infrastructure, effort, rewards, and unknown territory. Barriers were most consistently mapped to TDF domains: memory, attention and decision-making processes, environmental context and resources, and belief about consequences.

Development and Validation of the Minnesota Assessment of Pharmacogenomic Literacy (MAPL)

Ensuring that patients have an adequate understanding of pharmacogenomic (PGx) test results is a critical component of implementing precision medicine into clinical care. However, no PGx-specific validated literacy assessment has yet been developed. To address this need, we developed and validated the Minnesota Assessment of Pharmacogenomic Literacy (MAPLTM). Foundational work included a scoping review of patient and general public attitudes and experiences with pharmacogenomic testing, three focus groups, readability assessments, and review by experts and members of the general public. This resulted in a 15-item assessment designed to assess knowledge in four domains: underlying concepts, limitations, benefits, and privacy. For validation, 646 participants completed the MAPL as a part of a larger survey about pharmacogenomic research and statewide PGx implementation. Two items were deemed to be “too easy” and dropped. The remaining 13 items were retained in the final MAPL with good internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.75). Confirmatory factor analysis validated the four-domain construct of MAPL and suggested good model performance and high internal validity. The estimated coefficient loadings across 13 questions on the corresponding domains are all positive and statistically significant (p < 0.05). The MAPL covers multiple knowledge domains of specific relevance to PGx and is a useful tool for clinical and research settings where quantitative assessment of PGx literacy is of value.