Interventional cardiologists’ attitudes towards pharmacogenetic testing and impact on antiplatelet prescribing decisions

Aim: To determine if interventional cardiologists’ knowledge and attitudes toward pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing influenced their antiplatelet prescribing decisions in response to CYP2C19 results. Materials & methods: Surveys were administered prior to participating in a randomized trial of CYP2C19 testing. Associations between baseline knowledge/attitudes and agreement with the genotype-guided antiplatelet recommendations were determined using multivariable logistic regression. Results: 50% believed that PGx testing would be valuable to predict medication toxicity or efficacy. 64% felt well informed about PGx testing and its therapeutic application. However, PGx experience, knowledge, nor attitudes were significantly associated with agreement to genotype-guided antiplatelet recommendations. Conclusion: Cardiologists’ knowledge and attitudes were not associated with CYP2C19-guided antiplatelet prescribing, but larger studies should be done to confirm this finding.

Genotype-based chemotherapy for patients with gastrointestinal tumors: focus on oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and fluoropyrimidines

This review aimed to summarize the pharmacogenetic studies of the most commonly used drugs in the chemotherapy of gastrointestinal (GI) tumors: oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and fluoropyrimidines. So far, it has not been possible to develop an effective genotype-based approach for oxaliplatin. More and more evidence is emerging in favor of the fact that the choice of a dose of fluorouracil based on pharmacogenetic testing according to DPYD*2A, can be not only effective but also cost-effective. Additional, well-planned trials of the UGT1A1 genotype-based approach to irinotecan therapy are predicted to reduce adverse drug events in people with the UGT1A1*28/*28 genotypes and improve treatment efficacy in the rest of the patients, which might be cost-effective.

Pharmacogenetic testing for adverse drug reaction prevention: systematic review of economic evaluations and the appraisal of quality matters for clinical practice and implementation

Background Genetic testing has potential roles in identifying whether an individual would have risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from a particular medicine. Robust cost-effectiveness results on genetic testing would be useful for clinical practice and policy decision-making on allocating resources effectively. This study aimed to update a systematic review on economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to prevent ADRs and critically appraise the quality of reporting and sources of evidence for model input parameters. Methods We searched studies through Medline via PubMed, Scopus and CRD’s NHS Economic Evaluation up to October 2019. Studies investigating polymorphism-based pharmacogenetic testing, which guided drug therapies to prevent ADRs, using economic evaluation methods were included. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and assessed the quality of reporting using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines and the quality of data sources using the hierarchy of evidence developed by Cooper et al. Results Fifty-nine economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to avoid drug-induced ADRs were found between 2002 and 2018. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses were the most common methods of economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing. Most studies complied with the CHEERS checklist, except for single study-based economic evaluations which did not report uncertainty analysis (78%). There was a lack of high-quality evidence not only for estimating the clinical effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing, but also baseline clinical data. About 14% of the studies obtained clinical effectiveness data of testing from a meta-analysis of case-control studies with direct comparison, which was not listed in the hierarchy of evidence used. Conclusions Our review suggested that future single study-based economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing should report uncertainty analysis, as this could significantly affect the robustness of economic evaluation results. A specific ranking system for the quality of evidence is needed for the economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing of ADRs. Differences in parameters, methods and outcomes across studies, as well as population-level and system-level differences, may lead to the difficulty of comparing cost-effectiveness results across countries.