Browsing by keyword "pharmacogenomics"

Now showing items 1-4 of 4

    • Combinatorial Pharmacogenomic Testing Improves Outcomes for Older Adults With Depression
      Forester, Brent P.; Rothschild, Anthony J. (2020-05-19)
      OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the clinical utility of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing for informing medication selection among older adults who have experienced antidepressant medication failure for major depressive disorder (MDD). DESIGN: Post hoc analysis of data from a blinded, randomized controlled trial comparing two active treatment arms. SETTING: Psychiatry specialty and primary care clinics across 60 U.S. community and academic sites. PARTICIPANTS: Adults age 65 years or older at baseline (n=206), diagnosed with MDD and inadequate response to at least one medication on the combinatorial pharmacogenomic test report during the current depressive episode. INTERVENTION: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing to inform medication selection (guided-care), compared with treatment as usual (TAU). OUTCOMES: Mean percent symptom improvement, response rate, and remission rat eat week 8, measured using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale; medication switching; and comorbidity moderator analysis. RESULTS: At week 8, symptom improvement was not significantly different for guided-care than for TAU (=8.1%, t=1.64, df=187; p=0.102); however, guided-care showed significantly improved response (=13.6%, t=2.16, df=187; p=0.032) and remission (=12.7%, t=2.49, df=189; p=0.014) relative to TAU. By week 8, more than twice as many patients in guided-care than in TAU were on medications predicted to have no gene-drug interactions (chi(2)=19.3, df=2; p < 0.001). Outcomes in the guided-care arm showed consistent improvement through the end of the open-design 24-week trial, indicating durability of the effect. Differences in outcomes between arms were not significantly impacted by comorbidities. CONCLUSIONS: Combinatorial pharmacogenomic test-informed medication selection improved outcomes over TAU among older adults with depression.

    • Impact of pharmacogenomics on clinical outcomes in major depressive disorder in the GUIDED trial: A large, patient- and rater-blinded, randomized, controlled study
      Greden, John F.; Rothschild, Anthony J. (2019-04-01)
      Current prescribing practices for major depressive disorder (MDD) produce limited treatment success. Although pharmacogenomics may improve outcomes by identifying genetically inappropriate medications, studies to date were limited in scope. Outpatients (N=1167) diagnosed with MDD and with a patient- or clinician-reported inadequate response to at least one antidepressant were enrolled in the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) trial - a rater- and patient-blind randomized controlled trial. Patients were randomized to treatment as usual (TAU) or a pharmacogenomics-guided intervention arm in which clinicians had access to a pharmacogenomic test report to inform medication selections (guided-care). Medications were considered congruent ('use as directed' or 'use with caution' test categories) or incongruent ('use with increased caution and with more frequent monitoring' test category) with test results. Unblinding occurred after week 8. Primary outcome was symptom improvement [change in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17)] at week 8; secondary outcomes were response ( > /=50% decrease in HAM-D17) and remission (HAM-D17 < /=7) at week 8. At week 8, symptom improvement for guided-care was not significantly different than TAU (27.2% versus 24.4%, p=0.107); however, improvements in response (26.0% versus 19.9%, p=0.013) and remission (15.3% versus 10.1%, p=0.007) were statistically significant. Patients taking incongruent medications prior to baseline who switched to congruent medications by week 8 experienced greater symptom improvement (33.5% versus 21.1%, p=0.002), response (28.5% versus 16.7%, p=0.036), and remission (21.5% versus 8.5%, p=0.007) compared to those remaining incongruent. Pharmacogenomic testing did not significantly improve mean symptoms but did significantly improve response and remission rates for difficult-to-treat depression patients over standard of care (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02109939).

    • Insurance Coverage Policies for Pharmacogenomic and Multi-Gene Testing for Cancer
      Lu, Christine Y.; Loomer, Stephanie; Ceccarelli, Rachel; Mazor, Kathleen M.; Sabin, James; Clayton, Ellen Wright; Ginsburg, Geoffrey S.; Wu, Ann Chen (2018-05-16)
      Insurance coverage policies are a major determinant of patient access to genomic tests. The objective of this study was to examine differences in coverage policies for guideline-recommended pharmacogenomic tests that inform cancer treatment. We analyzed coverage policies from eight Medicare contractors and 10 private payers for 23 biomarkers (e.g., HER2 and EGFR) and multi-gene tests. We extracted policy coverage and criteria, prior authorization requirements, and an evidence basis for coverage. We reviewed professional society guidelines and their recommendations for use of pharmacogenomic tests. Coverage for KRAS, EGFR, and BRAF tests were common across Medicare contractors and private payers, but few policies covered PML/RARA, CD25, or G6PD. Thirteen payers cover multi-gene tests for nonsmall lung cancer, citing emerging clinical recommendations. Coverage policies for single and multi-gene tests for cancer treatments are consistent among Medicare contractors despite the lack of national coverage determinations. In contrast, coverage for these tests varied across private payers. Patient access to tests is governed by prior authorization among eight private payers. Substantial variations in how payers address guideline-recommended pharmacogenomic tests and the common use of prior authorization underscore the need for additional studies of the effects of coverage variation on cancer care and patient outcomes.

    • The Implementation Process for Pharmacogenomic Testing for Cancer-Targeted Therapies
      Wu, Ann Chen; Mazor, Kathleen M.; Ceccarelli, Rachel; Loomer, Stephanie; Lu, Christine Y. (2018-10-01)
      Recent advances in genomic medicine have led to the availability of genomic tests that have the potential to improve population health, yet the process for obtaining these tests and getting them reimbursed by insurers has not been described. The objective of this study was to describe the process of ordering pharmacogenomic tests by interviewing providers, patients, and laboratories about cancer-related pharmacogenomic tests. We interviewed patients who were prescribed, providers who prescribed medications that should be guided by pharmacogenomic testing, and individuals from diagnostic laboratories. A total of 10 providers, 16 patients, and eight diagnostic laboratories described logistical and insurance issues relating to ordering and receiving pharmacogenomic tests and medications. We found that the process of ordering pharmacogenomic tests is time-consuming, expensive, and complex. Ordering pharmacogenomic tests is quite different across institutions. Even in the same institution, multiple providers can order the test. Once the provider places the order for the pharmacogenomic test, the laboratory receives the request and usually begins testing without knowing how the test will be paid for. Next, the laboratory completes the pharmacogenomic testing and the results of the tests are reported to providers, patients, or placed directly in the medical record. In conclusion, processes related to ordering and obtaining insurance coverage for pharmacogenomic tests varies greatly across institutions and is time-consuming.