How to assess pharmacogenomic tests for implementation in the NHS in England.
health service
implementation
pharmacogenomics
Journal
British journal of clinical pharmacology
ISSN: 1365-2125
Titre abrégé: Br J Clin Pharmacol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7503323
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2023
09 2023
Historique:
revised:
28
05
2023
received:
19
12
2022
accepted:
28
05
2023
medline:
23
10
2023
pubmed:
14
6
2023
entrez:
14
6
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Pharmacogenomic testing has the potential to target medicines more effectively towards those who will benefit and avoid use in individuals at risk of harm. Health economies are actively considering how pharmacogenomic tests can be integrated into health care systems to improve use of medicines. However, one of the barriers to effective implementation is evaluation of the evidence including clinical usefulness, cost-effectiveness, and operational requirements. We sought to develop a framework that could aid the implementation of pharmacogenomic testing. We take the view from the National Health Service (NHS) in England. We used a literature review using EMBASE and Medline databases to identify prospective studies of pharmacogenomic testing, focusing on clinical outcomes and implementation of pharmacogenomics. Using this search, we identified key themes relating to the implementation of pharmacogenomic tests. We used a clinical advisory group with expertise in pharmacology, pharmacogenomics, formulary evaluation, and policy implementation to review data from our literature review and the interpretation of these data. With the clinical advisory group, we prioritized themes and developed a framework to evaluate proposals to implement pharmacogenomics tests. Themes that emerged from review of the literature and subsequent discussion were distilled into a 10-point checklist that is proposed as a tool to aid evidence-based implementation of pharmacogenomic testing into routine clinical care within the NHS. Our 10-point checklist outlines a standardized approach that could be used to evaluate proposals to implement pharmacogenomic tests. We propose a national approach, taking the view of the NHS in England. Using this approach could centralize commissioning of appropriate pharmacogenomic tests, reduce inequity and duplication using regional approaches, and provide a robust and evidence-based framework for adoption. Such an approach could also be applied to other health systems.
Types de publication
Review
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2649-2657Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.
Références
Roden DM, McLeod HL, Relling MV, et al. Pharmacogenomics. The Lancet. 2019;394(10197):521-532. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31276-0
Mortensen MB, Nordestgaard BG. Statin use in primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease according to 5 major guidelines for sensitivity, specificity, and number needed to treat. JAMA Cardiol. 2019;4(11):1131-1138. doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2019.3665
Pirmohamed M, James S, Meakin S, et al. Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients. BMJ. 2004;329(7456):15-19. doi:10.1136/bmj.329.7456.15
NHS Digital. Prescribing costs in hospitals and the community 2019-2020 [Internet]. Accessed May 4, 2022. https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/prescribing-costs-in-hospitals-and-the-community
GOV.UK. Genome UK: the future of healthcare [Internet]. Accessed May 4, 2022. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/genome-uk-the-future-of-healthcare
Royal College of Physicians and British Pharmacological Society. Personalised prescribing: using pharmacogenomics to improve patient outcomes [Internet]. London: RCP and BPS; 2022 Accessed March 5, 2022. https://www.rcp.ac.uk/projects/outputs/personalised-prescribing-using-pharmacogenomics-improve-patient-outcomes
NHS England. National genomic test directory [Internet]. Accessed April 20, 2023. https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/national-genomic-test-directories/
NHS England. Clinical commissioning urgent policy statement: pharmacogenomic testing for DPYD polymorphisms with fluoropyrimidine therapies [Internet]. Accessed May 4, 2022. https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/clinical-commissioning-urgent-policy-statement-pharmacogenomic-testing-for-dpyd-polymorphisms-with-fluoropyrimidine-therapies/
NHS England. National genomic test directory: supporting material [Internet]. Accessed May 18, 2022. https://www.england.nhs.uk/publication/national-genomic-test-directory-supporting-material/
Liu D, Olson KL, Manzi SF, Mandl KD. Patients dispensed medications with actionable pharmacogenomic biomarkers: rates and characteristics. Genet Med. 2021;23(4):782-786. doi:10.1038/s41436-020-01044-2
Hornberger J, Doberne J, Chien R. Laboratory-developed test-SynFRAME: an approach for assessing laboratory-developed tests synthesized from prior appraisal frameworks. Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2012;16(6):605-614. doi:10.1089/gtmb.2011.0177
NICE glossary. Accessed May 19, 2023. https://www.nice.org.uk/glossary
CPIC. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium [Internet]. Accessed September 15, 2020. https://cpicpgx.org/
DPWG Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG). [Internet]. Accessed September 15, 2020. https://www.knmp.nl/patientenzorg/medicatiebewaking/farmacogenetica/pharmacogenetics-1/pharmacogenetics
Drug Label Annotations [Internet]. PharmGKB. Accessed October 21, 2020. https://www.pharmgkb.org/labelAnnotations
White C, Scott RJ, Paul C, Ziolkowski A, Mossman D, Ackland S. Ethnic diversity of DPD activity and the DPYD gene: review of the literature. Pharmgenomics Pers Med. 2021;14:1603-1617. doi:10.2147/PGPM.S337147
Mallal S, Phillips E, Carosi G, et al. HLA-B*5701 screening for hypersensitivity to abacavir. N Engl J Med. 2008;358(6):568-579. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0706135
Newman WG, Payne K, Tricker K, et al. A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of thiopurine methyltransferase genotyping prior to azathioprine treatment: the TARGET study. Pharmacogenomics. 2011;12(6):815-826. doi:10.2217/pgs.11.32
Coenen MJH, de Jong DJ, van Marrewijk CJ, et al. Identification of patients with variants in TPMT and dose reduction reduces hematologic events during thiopurine treatment of inflammatory bowel disease. Gastroenterology. 2015;149(4):907-917.e7. doi:10.1053/j.gastro.2015.06.002
Pereira NL, Farkouh ME, So D, et al. Effect of genotype-guided oral P2Y12 inhibitor selection vs conventional clopidogrel therapy on ischemic outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: the TAILOR-PCI randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2020;324(8):761-771. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.12443
Thervet E, Loriot MA, Barbier S, et al. Optimization of initial tacrolimus dose using pharmacogenetic testing. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2010;87(6):721-726. doi:10.1038/clpt.2010.17
Shuker N, Bouamar R, van Schaik RHN, et al. A randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of Cyp3a5 genotype-based with body-weight-based tacrolimus dosing after living donor kidney transplantation. Am J Transplant. 2016;16(7):2085-2096. doi:10.1111/ajt.13691
Pirmohamed M, Burnside G, Eriksson N, et al. A randomized trial of genotype-guided dosing of warfarin. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(24):2294-2303. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1311386
Kimmel SE, French B, Kasner SE, et al. A pharmacogenetic versus a clinical algorithm for warfarin dosing. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(24):2283-2293. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1310669
Gage BF, Bass AR, Lin H, et al. Effect of genotype-guided warfarin dosing on clinical events and anticoagulation control among patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty: the GIFT randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318(12):1115-1124. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11469
Swen JJ, van der Wouden CH, Manson LE, et al. A 12-gene pharmacogenetic panel to prevent adverse drug reactions: an open-label, multicentre, controlled, cluster-randomised crossover implementation study. The Lancet. 2023;401(10374):347-356. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01841-4
Ferner R, Aronson J. Susceptibility to adverse drug reactions. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019 Oct;85(10):2205-2212.
Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Brozek J, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations for diagnostic tests and strategies. BMJ. 2008;336(7653):1106-1110. doi:10.1136/bmj.39500.677199.AE
Dhanda D, Guzauskas G, Carlson J, Basu A, Veenstra D. Are evidence standards different for genomic- vs. clinical-based precision medicine? A quantitative analysis of individualized warfarin therapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2017;102(5):805-814. doi:10.1002/cpt.663
O'Sullivan JW, Heneghan C, Perera R, et al. Variation in diagnostic test requests and outcomes: a preliminary metric for OpenPathology.net. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):4752. doi:10.1038/s41598-018-23263-z
Whiting D, Croker R, Watson J, Brogan A, Walker AJ, Lewis T. Optimising laboratory monitoring of chronic conditions in primary care: a quality improvement framework. BMJ Open Qual. 2019;8(1):e000349. doi:10.1136/bmjoq-2018-000349
CPIC® guideline for tacrolimus and CYP3A5 [Internet]. Accessed May 4, 2022. https://cpicpgx.org/guidelines/guideline-for-tacrolimus-and-cyp3a5/
Pallet N, Etienne I, Buchler M, et al. Long-term clinical impact of adaptation of initial tacrolimus dosing to CYP 3A5 genotype. Am J Transplant. 2016;16(9):2670-2675. doi:10.1111/ajt.13788
Vrijens B, Vincze G, Kristanto P, Urquhart J, Burnier M. Adherence to prescribed antihypertensive drug treatments: longitudinal study of electronically compiled dosing histories. BMJ. 2008;336(7653):1114-1117. doi:10.1136/bmj.39553.670231.25
Peyser B, Perry EP, Singh K, et al. Effects of delivering SLCO1B1 pharmacogenetic information in randomized trial and observational settings. Circ Genom Precis Med. 2018;11(9):e002228. doi:10.1161/CIRCGEN.118.002228
GOV.UK. Criteria for appraising the viability, effectiveness and appropriateness of a screening programme [Internet]. Accessed May 4, 2022. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/evidence-review-criteria-national-screening-programmes/criteria-for-appraising-the-viability-effectiveness-and-appropriateness-of-a-screening-programme
Plumpton CO, Alfirevic A, Pirmohamed M, Hughes DA. Cost effectiveness analysis of HLA-B*58:01 genotyping prior to initiation of allopurinol for gout. Rheumatology. 2017;56(10):1729-1739. doi:10.1093/rheumatology/kex253
Chen P, Lin JJ, Lu CS, et al. Carbamazepine-induced toxic effects and HLA-B*1502 screening in Taiwan. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(12):1126-1133. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1009717
McCormack M, Alfirevic A, Bourgeois S, et al. HLA-A*3101 and carbamazepine-induced hypersensitivity reactions in Europeans. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(12):1134-1143. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1013297
Mushiroda T, Takahashi Y, Onuma T, et al. Association of HLA-A*31:01 screening with the incidence of carbamazepine-induced cutaneous adverse reactions in a Japanese population. JAMA Neurol. 2018;75(7):842-849. doi:10.1001/jamaneurol.2018.0278
Kheiri B, Abdalla A, Haykal T, et al. Meta-analysis of genotype-guided versus standard dosing of vitamin K antagonists. Am J Cardiol. 2018;121(7):879-887. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2017.12.023
Holtzman NA, Watson MS. Promoting safe and effective genetic testing in the United States. Final report of the Task Force on Genetic Testing. J Child Fam Nurs. 1999;2(5):388-390. doi:10.1093/clinchem/45.5.732
McDermott JH, Mahaveer A, James RA, et al. Rapid point-of-care genotyping to avoid aminoglycoside-induced ototoxicity in neonatal intensive care. JAMA Pediatr. 2022;176(5):486-492. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.0187
Hughes DA. Economics of pharmacogenetic-guided treatments: underwhelming or overstated? Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018;103(5):749-751. doi:10.1002/cpt.1030
Hughes DA, Vilar FJ, Ward CC, Alfirevic A, Park BK, Pirmohamed M. Cost-effectiveness analysis of HLA B*5701 genotyping in preventing abacavir hypersensitivity. Pharmacogenetics. 2004;14(6):335-342. doi:10.1097/00008571-200406000-00002
Kimpton JE, Carey IM, Threapleton CJD, et al. Longitudinal exposure of English primary care patients to pharmacogenomic drugs: an analysis to inform design of pre-emptive pharmacogenomic testing. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;85(12):2734-2746. doi:10.1111/bcp.14100
Klieber M, Oberacher H, Hofstaetter S, et al. CYP2C19 phenoconversion by routinely prescribed proton pump inhibitors omeprazole and esomeprazole: clinical implications for personalized medicine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2015;354(3):426-430. doi:10.1124/jpet.115.225680
World Health Organization. Guide to G6PD deficiency rapid diagnostic testing to support P. vivax radical cure [Internet]. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2019. Accessed May 25, 2022. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/312082
Cooper-DeHoff RM, Niemi M, Ramsey LB, et al. The clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guideline for SLCO1B1, ABCG2, and CYP2C9 genotypes and statin-associated musculoskeletal symptoms. Clin Pharma and Therapeutics. 2022;111(5):1007-1021. doi:10.1002/cpt.2557
Using pharmacogenomic information in clinical practice-PRSB [Internet]. Accessed May 4, 2022. https://theprsb.org/projects/geneticsandmedicines/
Chen Z, Liew D, Kwan P. Effects of a HLA-B*15:02 screening policy on antiepileptic drug use and severe skin reactions. Neurology. 2014;83(22):2077-2084. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000001034