Pharmacogenomic testing can be used to guide medication selection in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Currently, there is no consensus on which gene or genes to consider in medication management. Here, we assessed the clinical validity of the combinatorial pharmacogenomic algorithm to predict sertraline blood levels in a subset of patients enrolled in the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) trial. Patients who reported taking sertraline within ≤2 weeks of the screening blood draw were included. All patients received combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing, which included a weighted assessment of individual phenotypes for multiple pharmacokinetic genes relevant for sertraline (CYP2C19, CYP2B6, and CYP3A4). Sertraline blood levels were compared between phenotypes based on: 1) the pharmacokinetic portion of the combinatorial pharmacogenomic algorithm, and 2) individual genes. When evaluated separately, individual genes (for CYP2C19 and CYP2B6) and the combinatorial algorithm were significant predictors of sertraline blood levels. However, in multivariate analyses that included individual genes and the combinatorial pharmacogenomic algorithm, only the combinatorial pharmacogenomic algorithm remained a significant predictor of sertraline blood levels. These findings support the clinical validity of the combinatorial pharmacogenomic algorithm, in that it is a superior predictor of sertraline blood levels compared to individual genes.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the Genomics Used to Improve DEpression Decisions (GUIDED) trial was to evaluate the utility of pharmacogenomic testing to improve outcomes among patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who had not responded to at least 1 prior medication trial. The objective of the present analysis was to assess outcomes for the subset of patients expected to benefit from combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing because they were taking medications with predicted gene-drug interactions. METHODS: Participants (enrolled from April 14, 2014, to February 10, 2017) had an inadequate response to at least 1 psychotropic medication in the current episode of MDD. Patients were randomized to treatment as usual (TAU) or the guided-care arm, in which clinicians had access to a combinatorial pharmacogenomic test report to inform medication selection. Patients and raters were blinded to study arm through week 8. The following outcomes were assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17): symptom improvement (percent change in HDRS-17 score), response ( > /= 50% decrease in HDRS-17 score), and remission (HDRS-17 score < /= 7). In the GUIDED trial, the primary endpoint of symptom improvement did not reach significance in the intent-to-treat cohort (P = .069). Here, a post hoc analysis of patients who were taking medications subject to gene-drug interactions at baseline as predicted by combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing (N = 912) is presented. RESULTS: Among participants taking medications subject to gene-drug interactions at baseline, outcomes at week 8 were significantly improved for those in the guided-care arm compared to TAU (symptom improvement: 27.1% versus 22.1%, P = .029; response: 27.0% versus 19.0%, P = .008; remission: 18.2% versus 10.7%, P = .003). When patients who switched medications were assessed, all outcomes were significantly improved in the guided-care arm compared to TAU (P = .011 for symptom improvement, P = .011 for response, P = .008 for remission). CONCLUSIONS: By identifying and focusing on the patients with predicted gene-drug interactions, use of a combinatorial pharmacogenomic test significantly improved outcomes among patients with MDD who had at least 1 prior medication failure. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02109939.