Primary care physician experiences with integrated pharmacogenomic testing in a community health system

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.

Moving towards the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in Quebec

Clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics (PGx) into routine care will elevate the current paradigm of treatment decisions. However, while PGx tests are increasingly becoming reliable and affordable, several barriers have limited their widespread usage in Canada. Globally, over ninety successful PGx implementors can serve as models. The purpose of this paper is to outline the PGx implementation barriers documented in Quebec (Canada) to suggest efficient solutions based on existing PGx clinics and propose an adapted clinical implementation model. We conclude that the province of Quebec is ready to implement PGx.

Providers' Use of Pharmacogenetic Testing to Inform Antidepressant Prescribing: Results of Qualitative Interviews

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacogenetic testing (PGx) for patients experiencing depression has been associated with modest improvements in symptoms. However, little is known about providers' use of PGx, including how and for whom providers use the test results in clinical decision making. In this article, results from qualitative interviews on the experience of providers participating in a pragmatic trial of PGx are described; implications of the providers' experiences are highlighted to inform future implementation of PGx.

METHODS

Interviews were conducted with providers participating in the trial (N=61) who treated veterans who had depression. Questions were informed by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. A rapid analytic approach was used.

RESULTS

Two main themes were identified: perceptions regarding which patients would likely benefit from PGx and approaches to using the test results in prescribing. Providers generally expressed positive experiences with using PGx results. However, the providers varied in application of the test results to clinical decision making regarding medications, were uncertain about how much to rely on the results, and differed in perceptions about which patients would benefit from PGx.

CONCLUSIONS

To support future implementation, policies and procedures are needed, as well as mechanisms to support ongoing provider education on PGx.

Personalized medicine in a community health system: the NorthShore experience

Genomic and personalized medicine implementation efforts have largely centered on specialty care in tertiary health systems. There are few examples of fully integrated care systems that span the healthcare continuum. In 2014, NorthShore University HealthSystem launched the Center for Personalized Medicine to catalyze the delivery of personalized medicine. Successful implementation required the development of a scalable family history collection tool, the Genetic and Wellness Assessment (GWA) and Breast Health Assessment (BHA) tools; integrated pharmacogenomics programming; educational programming; electronic medical record integration; and robust clinical decision support tools. To date, more than 225,000 patients have been screened for increased hereditary conditions, such as cancer risk, through these tools in primary care. More than 35,000 patients completed clinical genetic testing following GWA or BHA completion. An innovative program trained more than 100 primary care providers in genomic medicine, activated with clinical decision support and access to patient genetic counseling services and digital healthcare tools. The development of a novel bioinformatics platform (FLYPE) enabled the incorporation of genomics data into electronic medical records. To date, over 4,000 patients have been identified to have a pathogenic or likely pathogenic variant in a gene with medical management implications. Over 33,000 patients have clinical pharmacogenomics data incorporated into the electronic health record supported by clinical decision support tools. This manuscript describes the evolution, strategy, and successful multispecialty partnerships aligned with health system leadership that enabled the implementation of a comprehensive personalized medicine program with measurable patient outcomes through a genomics-enabled learning health system model that utilizes implementation science frameworks.

Pharmacogenomics implementation across multiple clinic settings: a qualitative evaluation

Aim: To advance clinical adoption and implementation of pharmacogenomics (PGx) testing, barriers and facilitators to these efforts must be understood. This study identified and examined barriers and facilitators to active implementation of a PGx program across multiple clinic settings in an academic healthcare system. Materials & methods: 28 contributors to the PGx implementation (e.g., clinical providers, informatics specialists) completed an interview to elicit their perceptions of the implementation. Results: Qualitative analysis identified several barriers and facilitators that spanned different stages of the implementation process. Specifically, unclear test payment mechanisms, decision support tool development, rigid workflows and provider education were noted as barriers to the PGx implementation. A multidisciplinary implementation team and leadership support emerged as key facilitators. Furthermore, participants also suggested strategies to overcome or maintain these factors. Conclusion: Assessing real-world implementation perceptions and suggested strategies from a range of implementation contributors facilitates a more comprehensive framework and best-practice guidelines for PGx implementation.

Primary healthcare provider experience of knowledge brokering interventions for mood management

Background

Knowledge brokering is a knowledge translation strategy used in healthcare settings to facilitate the implementation of evidence into practice. How healthcare providers perceive and respond to various knowledge translation approaches is not well understood. This qualitative study used the Theoretical Domains Framework to examine healthcare providers' experiences with receiving one of two knowledge translation strategies: a remote knowledge broker (rKB); or monthly emails, for encouraging delivery of mood management interventions to patients enrolled in a smoking cessation program.

Methods

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 21 healthcare providers recruited from primary care teams. We used stratified purposeful sampling to recruit participants who were allocated to receive either the rKB, or a monthly email-based knowledge translation strategy as part of a cluster randomized controlled trial. Interviews were structured around domains of the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to explore determinants influencing practice change. Data were coded into relevant domains.

Results

Both knowledge translation strategies were considered helpful prompts to remind participants to deliver mood interventions to patients presenting depressive symptoms. Neither strategy appeared to have influenced the health care providers on the domains we probed. The domains pertaining to knowledge and professional identity were perceived as facilitators to implementation, while domains related to beliefs about consequences, emotion, and environmental context acted as barriers and/or facilitators to healthcare providers implementing mood management interventions.

Conclusion

Both strategies served as reminders and reinforced providers' knowledge regarding the connection between smoking and depressed mood. The TDF can help researchers better understand the influence of specific knowledge translation strategies on healthcare provider behavior change, as well as potential barriers and facilitators to implementation of evidence-informed interventions. Environmental context should be considered to address challenges and facilitate the movement of knowledge into clinical practice.

Attitudes about pharmacogenomic testing vary by healthcare specialty

Aim: To understand how attitudes toward pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing among healthcare providers varies by specialty. Methods: Providers reported comfort ordering PGx testing and its perceived utility on web-based surveys before and after genetics education. Primary quantitative analyses compared primary care providers (PCPs) to specialty providers at both timepoints. Results: PCPs were more likely than specialty care providers to rate PGx testing as useful at both timepoints. Education increased comfort ordering PGx tests, with larger improvements among PCPs than specialty providers. Over 90% of cardiology and internal medicine providers rated PGx testing as useful at pre- and post-education. Conclusion: PCPs overwhelmingly perceive PGx to be useful, and provider education is particularly effective for improving PCPs' confidence. Education for all specialties will be essential to ensure appropriate integration into routine practice.

Public perceptions of pharmacogenomic services in Ireland - Are people with chronic disease more likely to want service availability than those without? A questionnaire study

Background

As pharmacogenomic services begin to emerge in primary care, the insight of the public is crucial for its integration into clinical practice.

Objectives

To establish perceptions of pharmacogenomics (awareness, understanding, openness to availability, perceived benefits and concerns, willingness to pay, and service setting) and investigate if they differ between those with and without chronic disease(s).

Methods

An anonymous, online questionnaire generated using Qualtrics® and circulated via social media and posters placed in eight participating community pharmacies was conducted with Irish adults. The questions were designed to consider existing literature on patient perceptions of pharmacogenomics. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize questionnaire responses. Chi-square test was used to compare categorical variables, while independent sample t-test and one-way ANOVA were used to compare the mean values of two (with and without chronic disease) and three groups (multimorbidity (two or more chronic conditions) and polypharmacy (prescribed four or more regular medicines) (MMPP), a single chronic disease, and those without existing medical conditions) respectively Logistic regression was used to evaluate age and gender adjusted associations of chronic disease(s) with responses. A p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

A total of 421 responses were received, 30% (n = 120) of whom reported having a chronic disease. Overall, respondents reported low awareness (44%, n = 166) and poor knowledge (55%, n = 212) of pharmacogenomics. After explaining pharmacogenomics to respondents, patients with chronic disease(s) were 2.17 times more likely (p < 0.001) to want pharmacogenomic services availability than those without existing conditions, adjusted for age and gender (driven by preferences of those with MMPP than those with single chronic disease). Respondents demonstrated a high level of interest and noted both the potential benefits and downsides of pharmacogenomic testing. Willingness-to-pay was not associated with having a chronic disease and respondents were more positive about primary care (community pharmacy or general practice) rather than hospital-based pharmacogenomics implementation.

Conclusion

The Irish public in general and those with chronic disease in particular are strongly supportive of pharmacogenomic testing, highlighting an unmet need for its incorporation in medicines optimization. These data underline the need for more research on the implementation of community-based pharmacogenomics services for MMPP patients and ubiquitous pharmacogenomics education programs.

General practitioners' (GPs) experience, attitudes and needs on clinical genetic services: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The proliferation and growing demands of genetic testing are anticipated to revolutionise medical practice. As gatekeepers of healthcare systems, general practitioners (GPs) are expected to play a critical role in the provision of clinical genetic services. This paper aims to review existing literature on GPs' experience, attitudes and needs towards clinical genetic services.

DESIGN

A systematic mixed studies review of papers published between 2010 and 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

The inclusion criterion was peer-reviewed articles in English and related to GPs' experience, views and needs on any genetic testing.

INFORMATION SOURCES

The PubMed, PsycINFO, Cochrane, EMBASE databases were searched using Mesh terms, Boolean and wildcards combinations to identify peer-reviewed articles published from 2010 to 2022. Study quality was assessed using Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Only articles that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were selected. A thematic meta-synthesis was conducted on the final sample of selected articles to identify key themes.

RESULTS

A total of 62 articles were included in the review. Uncertainty over GPs' role in providing genetic services were attributed by the lack of confidence and time constraints and rarity of cases may further exacerbate their reluctance to shoulder an expanded role in clinical genetics. Although educational interventions were found to increasing GPs' knowledge and confidence to carry out genetic tasks, varied interest on genetic testing and preference for a shared care model with other genetic health professionals have resulted in minimal translation to clinical adoption.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the need for deeper exploration of GPs' varied experience and attitudes towards clinical genetic services to better facilitate targeted intervention in the adoption of clinical genetics.

Utilizing Pharmacogenomics Results to Determine Opioid Appropriateness and Improve Pain Management in a Patient with Osteoarthritis

The opioid epidemic in the United States has exposed the need for providers to limit opioid dispensing and identify at-risk patients prior to prescribing opioids. With pharmacogenomic testing, clinicians can analyze hundreds of medications—including commonly prescribed opioids—against genetic results to understand and predict risk and response. Moreover, knowledge of genotypic variants and altered function can help decrease trial and error prescribing, identify patients at-risk for adverse drug events, and improve pain control. This patient case demonstrates how pharmacogenomic test results identified drug–gene interactions and provided insight about a patient’s inadequate opioid therapy response. With pharmacogenomic information, the patient’s healthcare team discontinued opioid therapy and selected a more appropriate regimen for osteoarthritis (ie, celecoxib), resulting in improved pain control and quality of life.

A blockchain-based framework to support pharmacogenetic data sharing

The successful implementation of pharmacogenetics (PGx) into clinical practice requires patient genomic data to be shared between stakeholders in multiple settings. This creates a number of barriers to widespread adoption of PGx, including privacy concerns related to the storage and movement of identifiable genomic data. Informatic solutions that support secure and equitable data access for genomic data are therefore important to PGx. Here we propose a methodology that uses smart contracts implemented on a blockchain-based framework, PGxChain, to address this issue. The design requirements for PGxChain were identified through a systematic literature review, identifying technical challenges and barriers impeding the clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics. These requirements included security and privacy, accessibility, interoperability, traceability and legal compliance. A proof-of-concept implementation based on Ethereum was then developed that met the design requirements. PGxChain's performance was examined using Hyperledger Caliper for latency, throughput, and transaction success rate. The findings clearly indicate that blockchain technology offers considerable potential to advance pharmacogenetic data sharing, particularly with regard to PGx data security and privacy, large-scale accessibility of PGx data, PGx data interoperability between multiple health care providers and compliance with data-sharing laws and regulations.

Utilizing Public Health Frameworks and Partnerships to Ensure Equity in DNA-Based Population Screening

DNA-Based population screening in the United States has the promise to improve the health of all people in all communities. We highlight recent DNA-based population screening examples at the state, local, and individual level. Key public health principles and concepts with a focus on equity appear to be lacking in current efforts. We request ‘A Call to Action’ that involves all partners in DNA-based population screening. Potential actions to consider include: a) identification and elimination of systemic barriers that result in health inequities in DNA-based population screening and follow-up; b) creation of a national multidisciplinary advisory committee with representation from underserved communities; c) revisiting well-described public health screening principles and frameworks to guide new screening decisions and initiatives; d) inclusion of the updated Ten Essential Public Health Services with equity at the core in efforts at the local, state and national level.

Pharmacogenetic testing among patients with depression in a US managed care population

Actionable drug–gene pairs relevant to depression treatment include CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 with specific antidepressants. While clinical use of pharmacogenetic testing is growing, little is known about pharmacogenetic testing for depression treatment in managed care. We determined the incidence of single‐gene CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 testing following a new depression episode among US managed care patients, and described characteristics and antidepressant use of patients receiving tests. We used paid medical and pharmacy claims for patients from commercial health plans in the US. For adult patients with a new depression episode from January 1, 2013 to June 30, 2018, we identified covered claims for single‐gene CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 pharmacogenetic tests and antidepressant fills. Fewer than 1% (n = 1795) of the depressed cohort (n = 438,534) received a single‐gene CYP2D6 or CYP2C19 test through their insurance within 365 days of their earliest depression episode. The percentage of patients who received a test nearly tripled from 0.2% in 2013 to 0.5% in 2014 before plateauing at 0.4% from 2014 to 2017. Among the patients who received a single‐gene CYP2D6 or CYP2C19 test and filled an antidepressant within 365 days of their depression diagnosis, up to 30% may have had their initial antidepressant informed by the test result. Our findings describe the use of antidepressants before and after pharmacogenetic testing, which is clinically relevant as pharmacogenomic testing becomes more common in clinical practice. Our study also emphasizes the need for procedure and billing codes that capture multiple‐gene panel tests to be more widely implemented in administrative databases.

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

Introduction: Pharmacogenomic testing can indicate which drugs may have limited therapeutic action or lead to adverse effects, hence guiding rational and safe prescribing. However, in the UK and other countries, there are still significant barriers to implementation of testing in primary care. Objective: This systematic review presents the barriers and enablers to the implementation of pharmacogenomics in primary care setting. Materials & methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and CINAHL databases were searched through to July 2020 for studies that reported primary qualitative data of primary care professionals and patient views. Following screening, data extraction and quality assessment, data synthesis was undertaken using meta-aggregation based on the theoretical domain's framework (TDF). Confidence in the synthesized findings relating to credibility and dependability was established using CONQual. Eligible papers were categorized into six TDF domains - knowledge; social and professional roles; behavioral regulation; beliefs and consequences; environmental context and resources; and social influences. Results: From 1669 citations, eighteen eligible studies were identified across seven countries, with a sample size of 504 participants including both primary care professionals and patients. From the data, 15 synthesized statements, all with moderate CONQual rating emerged. These categories range from knowledge, awareness among Primary Care Physicians and patients, professional relationships, negative impact of PGx, belief that PGx can reduce adverse drug reactions, clinical evidence, cost-effectiveness, informatics, reporting issues and social issues. Conclusion: Through use of TDF, fifteen synthesized statements provide policymakers with valuable recommendations for the implementation of pharmacogenomics in primary care. In preparation, policymakers need to consider the introduction of effective educational strategies for both PCPs and patients to raise knowledge, awareness, and engagement. The actual introduction of PGx will require reorganization with decision support tools to aid use of PGx in primary care, with a clear delegation of roles and responsibilities between general professionals and pharmacists supplemented by a local pool of experts. Furthermore, policy makers need to address the cost effectiveness of pharmacogenomics and having appropriate infrastructure supporting testing and interpretation including informatic solutions for utilizing pharmacogenomic results.

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.

The integration of personalized medicine into health systems: progress and a path forward

Tweetable abstract Fueled by technological advancements and the integration efforts of many pioneer health systems, personalized medicine is now being clinically implemented at measurable but incomplete levels system-wide.

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.

Pharmacogenomic Clinical Decision Support: A Review, How-to Guide, and Future Vision

Clinical decision support (CDS) is an essential part of any pharmacogenomics (PGx) implementation. Increasingly, institutions have implemented CDS tools in the clinical setting to bring PGx data into patient care, and several have published their experiences with these implementations. However, barriers remain that limit the ability of some programs to create CDS tools to fit their PGx needs. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to summarize the types, functions, and limitations of PGx CDS currently in practice. Then, we provide an approachable step‐by‐step how‐to guide with a case example to help implementers bring PGx to the front lines of care regardless of their setting. Particular focus is paid to the five “rights” of CDS as a core around designing PGx CDS tools. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of opportunities and areas of growth for PGx CDS.

Adolescent perceptions of pharmacogenetic testing

Background: Despite the expansion of pharmacogenetics (PGx), the views of pediatric patients remain unknown. This study explores adolescents' understanding and perceptions of PGx testing. Methods: Adolescents who had PGx testing were interviewed and their electronic health records were reviewed. Results: Adolescents accurately described reason for testing and most felt the results impacted their current and future care. None perceived risks to securing future employment or insurance. All felt PGx would benefit their peers. Conclusion: Adolescents understand the reasons for PGx and perceive testing to be useful, low risk and applicable to peers. Findings from this study advocate for the inclusion of adolescents in shared decision-making regarding testing and for active engagement in the discussion of results.

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.

Pharmacogenomic testing for mental health (Part II): qualitative analysis of early adopter prescriber perceptions

Aim: We sought to explore how early adopters use pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing for treating depression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Patients & methods: Prescribers of the Informed PGx (Progenity, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI 48108, USA) test completed a phone survey assessing use of PGx testing for different scenarios. We conducted a qualitative thematic text analysis of transcribed audio recordings of open-ended responses (n = 62). Results: PGx testing was used when treating multiple comorbidities or resistant disease, and to ease patients' concerns with future therapy. Use of PGx testing is influenced by insurance coverage, interpretability of results and results turnaround time. Conclusion: Prescribers used PGx tests to modify medications for complex patients with depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and other disorders to alleviate concerns related to adverse effects and lack of effectiveness.

Providers' perspectives on the clinical utility of pharmacogenomic testing in pediatric patients

Aim: To assess providers' knowledge, attitudes, perceptions, and experiences related to pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing in pediatric patients. Materials & methods: An electronic survey was sent to multidisciplinary healthcare providers at a pediatric hospital. Results: Of 261 respondents, 71.3% were slightly or not at all familiar with PGx, despite 50.2% reporting prior PGx education or training. Most providers, apart from psychiatry, perceived PGx to be at least moderately useful to inform clinical decisions. However, only 26.4% of providers had recent PGx testing experience. Unfamiliarity with PGx and uncertainty about the clinical value of testing were common perceived challenges. Conclusion: Low PGx familiarity among pediatric providers suggests additional education and electronic resources are needed for PGx examples in which data support testing in children.

Synthesis of major pharmacogenomics pretest counseling themes: a multisite comparison

The accessibility of pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing has grown substantially over the last decade and with it has arisen a demand for patients to be counseled on the use of these tests. While guidelines exist for the use of PGx results; objective determinants for who should receive PGx testing remain incomplete. PGx clinical services have been created to meet these screening and education needs and significant variability exists between these programs. This article describes the practices of four PGx clinics during pretest counseling sessions. A description of the major tenets of the benefits, limitations and risks of testing are compiled. Additional tools are provided to serve as a foundation for those wishing to begin or expand their own counseling service.

Primary care and mental health providers' perceptions of implementation of pharmacogenetics testing for depression prescribing

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenetic testing (PGx) has the potential to improve the quality of psychiatric prescribing by considering patients' genetic profile. However, there is limited scientific evidence supporting its efficacy or guiding its implementation. The Precision Medicine in Mental Health (PRIME) Care study is a pragmatic randomized controlled trial evaluating the effectiveness of a specific commercially-available pharmacogenetic (PGx) test to inform antidepressant prescribing at 22 sites across the U.S. Simultaneous implementation science methods using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) are integrated throughout the trial to identify contextual factors likely to be important in future implementation of PGx. The goal of this study was to understand providers' perceptions of PGx for antidepressant prescribing and implications for future implementation.

METHODS

Qualitative focus groups (n = 10) were conducted at the beginning of the trial with Primary Care and Mental Health providers (n = 31) from six PRIME Care sites. Focus groups were audio-recorded and transcribed and data were analyzed using rapid analytic procedures organized by CFIR domains.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed themes in the CFIR Intervention Characteristics domain constructs of Evidence, Relative Advantage, Adaptability, Trialability, Complexity, and Design that are important for understanding providers' perceptions of PGx testing. Results indicate: 1) providers had limited experience and knowledge of PGx testing and its evidence base, particularly for psychiatric medications; 2) providers were hopeful that PGx could increase their precision in depression prescribing and improve patient engagement, but were uncertain about how results would influence treatment; 3) providers were concerned about potential misinterpretation of PGx results and how to incorporate testing into their workflow; 4) primary care providers were less familiar and comfortable with application of PGx testing to antidepressant prescribing than psychiatric providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Provider perceptions may serve as facilitators or barriers to implementation of PGx for psychiatric prescribing. Incorporating implementation science into the conduct of the RCT adds value by uncovering factors to be addressed in preparing for future implementation, should the practice prove effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03170362 ; Registered 31 May 2017.

Primary Care Physician Experiences with Integrated Population-Scale Genetic Testing: A Mixed-Methods Assessment

The scalable delivery of genomic medicine requires collaboration between genetics and non-genetics providers. Thus, it is essential to investigate and address the perceived value of and barriers to incorporating genetic testing into the clinical practice of primary care providers (PCPs). We used a mixed-methods approach of qualitative interviews and surveys to explore the experience of PCPs involved in the pilot DNA-10K population genetic testing program. Similar to previous research, PCPs reported low confidence with tasks related to ordering, interpreting and managing the results of genetic tests, and identified the need for additional education. PCPs endorsed high levels of utility for patients and their families but noted logistical challenges to incorporating genetic testing into their practice. Overall PCPs were not familiar with the United States' Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act and they expressed high levels of concern for patient data privacy and potential insurance discrimination. This PCP feedback led to the development and implementation of several processes to improve the PCP experience with the DNA-10K program. These results contribute to the knowledge base regarding genomic implementation using a mixed provider model and may be beneficial for institutions developing similar clinical programs.

Challenges in pharmacotherapy for older adults: a framework for pharmacogenomics implementation

Older adults are at high risk for inappropriate prescribing, developing polypharmacy, adverse drug events and poor treatment outcomes due to multimorbidity and geriatric syndromes. Pharmacogenomics could allow healthcare professionals to provide optimal patient care while minimizing the risk of adverse drug events and simplifying complex medication regimens. The implementation of pharmacogenomics in geriatrics medicine requires a broad multilayered bottom-up approach. These include curriculum redesign, rethinking experiential education and patient and provider education. There are barriers associated with adopting pharmacogenomics into clinical practice. These barriers may include economic factors, workflow and informatics support. However, addressing these barriers primarily requires creating a culture of innovative practices in patient care, ongoing interprofessional continuing education and an interdisciplinary approach for patient care.

Pharmacogenetic testing in primary care practice: opinions of physicians, pharmacists and patients

Aim: Although health authorities have set pharmacogenetic (PGx) markers on labels of hundreds of drugs, the use of PGx in clinical care remains infrequent. The adoption of PGx will depend on the opinions of physicians, pharmacists and patients. Materials & methods: Qualitative focus group interviews were performed with 23 physicians, 11 pharmacists and 30 patients. Results: Majority of the participants showed enthusiasm toward the implementation of PGx in clinics. Lack of knowledge on PGx, roles of healthcare providers, factors in favor and challenges of PGx implementation, ethical and insurance issues, educational and tools needs were the key themes that emerged from the interviews. Conclusion: Several barriers impede the uptake of PGx in clinics, however, opinions of physicians, pharmacists and patients are mostly favorable.

Assessing the Implementation of Pharmacogenomic Panel-Testing in Primary Care in the Netherlands Utilizing a Theoretical Framework

Despite overcoming many implementation barriers, pharmacogenomic (PGx) panel-testing is not routine practice in the Netherlands. Therefore, we aim to study pharmacists' perceived enablers and barriers for PGx panel-testing among pharmacists participating in a PGx implementation study. Here, pharmacists identify primary care patients, initiating one of 39 drugs with a Dutch Pharmacogenetic Working Group (DPWG) recommendation and subsequently utilizing the results of a 12 gene PGx panel test to guide dose and drug selection. Pharmacists were invited for a general survey and a semi-structured interview based on the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases (TICD) framework, aiming to identify implementation enablers and barriers, if they had managed at least two patients with actionable PGx results. In total, 15 semi-structured interviews were performed before saturation point was reached. Of these, five barrier themes emerged: (1) unclear procedures, (2) undetermined reimbursement for PGx test and consult, (3) insufficient evidence of clinical utility for PGx panel-testing, (4) infrastructure inefficiencies, and (5) HCP PGx knowledge and awareness; and two enabler themes: (1) pharmacist perceived role in delivering PGx, and (2) believed clinical utility of PGx. Despite a strong belief in the beneficial effects of PGx, pharmacists' barriers remain, an these hinder implementation in primary care.

Pharmacogenomics: Prescribing Precisely

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) is a powerful tool that can predict increased risks of adverse effects and sub-therapeutic response to medications. This article establishes the core principles necessary for a primary care provider to meaningfully and prudently use PGx testing. Key topics include in which patients PGx testing should be considered, how PGx tests are ordered, how the results are translated into clinical recommendations, and what further advancements are likely in the near future. This will provide clinicians with a foundational knowledge of PGx that can allow incorporation of this tool into their practice or support further personal investigation.

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

Pharmacogenetic testing can help identify primary care patients at increased risk for medication toxicity, poor response or treatment failure and inform drug therapy. While testing availability is increasing, providers are unprepared to routinely use pharmacogenetic testing for clinical decision-making. Practice-based resources are needed to overcome implementation barriers for pharmacogenetic testing in primary care.The NHGRI's IGNITE I Network (Implementing GeNomics In pracTicE; www.ignite-genomics.org) explored practice models, challenges and implementation barriers for clinical pharmacogenomics. Based on these experiences, we present a stepwise approach pharmacogenetic testing in primary care: patient identification; pharmacogenetic test ordering; interpretation and application of test results, and patient education. We present clinical factors to consider, test-ordering processes and resources, and provide guidance to apply test results and counsel patients. Practice-based resources such as this stepwise approach to clinical decision-making are important resources to equip primary care providers to use pharmacogenetic testing.

Pharmacogenomic Testing: Clinical Evidence and Implementation Challenges

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

Implementation of wide-scale pharmacogenetic testing in primary care

The convergence of translational genomics and biomedical informatics has changed healthcare delivery. Institutional consortia have begun implementing lab testing and decision support for drug–gene interactions. Aggregate datasets are now revealing the impact of clinical decision support for drug–gene interactions. Given the pleiotropic nature of pharmacogenes, interdisciplinary teams and robust clinical decision support tools must exist within an informatics framework built to be flexible and capable of cross-talk between clinical specialties. Navigation of the challenges presented with the implementation of five steps to build a genetics program infrastructure requires the expertise of multiple healthcare professionals. Ultimately, this manuscript describes our efforts to place pharmacogenomics in the hands of the primary care provider integrating this information into a patient’s healthcare over their lifetime.

Implementation and obstacles of pharmacogenetics in clinical practice: An international survey

AIMS

Eight years ago, a paper-based survey was administered during the World Pharma 2010 meeting, asking about the challenges of implementing pharmacogenetics (PGx) in clinical practice. The data collected at the time gave an idea about the progress of this implementation and what still needs to be done. Since then, although there have been major initiatives to push PGx forward, PGx clinical implementation may still be facing different challenges in different parts of the world. Our aim was therefore to distribute a follow-up international survey in electronic format to elucidate an overview on the current stage of implementation, acceptance and challenges of PGx in academic institutions around the world.

METHODS

This is an online anonymous LimeSurvey-based study launched on 11 November 2018. Survey questions were adapted from the initially published manuscript in 2010. An extensive web search for worldwide scientists potentially involved in PGx research resulted in a total of 1973 names. Countries were grouped based on the Human Development Index.

RESULTS

There were 204 respondents from 43 countries. Despite the wide availability of PGx tests, the consistently positive attitude towards their applications and advances in the field, progress of the clinical implementation of PGx still faces many challenges all around the globe.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical implementation of PGx started over a decade ago but there is a gap in progress around the globe and discrepancies between the challenges reported by different countries, despite some challenges being universal. Further studies on ways to overcome these challenges are warranted.

Implementing pharmacogenetic testing in rural primary care practices: a pilot feasibility study

Aim: Assess feasibility and perspectives of pharmacogenetic testing/PGx in rural, primary care physician (PCP) practices when PCPs are trained to interpret/apply results and testing costs are covered. Methods: Participants included PCPs who agreed to training, surveys and interviews and eligible patients who agreed to surveys and testing. 51 patients from three practices participated. Results: Prestudy, no PCP had ever ordered a PGx test. Test results demonstrated gene variations in 30% of patients, related to current medications, with PCPs reporting changes to drug management. Poststudy, test cost was still a concern, but now PCPs reported practical barriers, including the utilization of PGx results over time. PCPs and patients had favorable responses to testing. Summary: PGx testing is feasible in rural PCP practices.

Challenges and lessons learned from clinical pharmacogenetic implementation of multiple gene-drug pairs across ambulatory care settings

PURPOSE

Incorporating a patient's genotype into the clinical decision-making process is one approach to precision medicine. The University of Florida (UF) Health Precision Medicine Program is a pharmacist-led multidisciplinary effort that has led the clinical implementation of six gene-drug(s) pairs to date. This study focuses on the challenges encountered and lessons learned with implementing pharmacogenetic testing for three of these: CYP2D6-opioids, CYP2D6/CYP2C19-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, and CYP2C19-proton pump inhibitors within six pragmatic clinical trials at UF Health and partners.

METHODS

We compared common measures collected within each of the pharmacogenetic implementations as well as solicited feedback from stakeholders to identify challenges, successes, and lessons learned.

RESULTS

We identified several challenges related to trial design and implementation, and learned valuable lessons. Most notably, case discussions are effective for prescriber education, prescribers need clear concise guidance on genotype-based actions, having genotype results available at the time of the patient-prescriber encounter helps optimize the ability to act on them, children prefer noninvasive sample collection, and study participants are willing to answer patient-reported outcomes questionnaires if they are not overly burdensome, among others.

CONCLUSION

The lessons learned from implementing three gene-drug pairs in ambulatory care settings will help shape future pharmacogenetic clinical trials and clinical implementations.

Qualitative user evaluation of a revised pharmacogenetic educational toolkit

Introduction

Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing is a leading application for personalized and precision medicine; however, there are barriers, including limited provider and patient understanding, which affect its uptake. There is a need for tools that can enhance the patient and provider experience with testing and promoting the shared and informed decision-making.

Materials and methods

In this study, we sought to gather additional feedback on a PGx toolkit comprised of four educational tools that had been previously evaluated through an online survey by pharmacists. Specifically, we conducted semi-structured interviews with pharmacists and members of the public regarding their understanding and utility of the toolkit and its individual components.

Results

Participants found three of the four toolkit components, a test information sheet, flipbook, and results sheet, to be useful and important. The fourth component, results card, was viewed less favorably. Participants differed in their preference for medical jargon and detailed results nomenclature (namely star * alleles).

Conclusion

User input during the development of educational materials is essential for optimizing utilization, effectiveness, and comprehension.

Patient perspectives following pharmacogenomics results disclosure in an integrated health system

Aim: To assess patient perceptions and utilization of pharmacogenomics (PGx) testing in an integrated community health system. Methods: Fifty-seven patients completed an online survey assessing their experiences with PGx testing offered through two methods: a designated PGx clinic or direct access in-home testing. Results: The majority of participants perceived PGx testing as helpful in their healthcare and reported understanding their results. Some had concerns about privacy and discrimination; most lacked familiarity with the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act. There were no significant differences in views between participants tested through either model. Conclusion: Participants reported value in both methods of PGx testing. Patient experiences, understanding and result utilization will play an important role in informing future development and implementation of PGx programs.