Les enjeux de la translation des technologies : le cas des tests de pharmacogénétique au Québec

Problématique : L’arrivée des tests de pharmacogénétique a été annoncée dans les médias et la littérature scientifique telle une révolution, un tournant vers la médecine personnalisée. En réalité, cette révolution se fait toujours attendre. Plusieurs barrières législatives, scientifiques, professionnelles et éthiques sont décrites dans la littérature comme étant la cause du délai de la translation des tests de pharmacogénétique, du laboratoire vers la clinique. Cet optimisme quant à l’arrivée de la pharmacogénétique et ces barrières existent-elles au Québec? Quel est le contexte de translation des tests de pharmacogénétique au Québec? Actuellement, il n’existe aucune donnée sur ces questions. Il est pourtant essentiel de les évaluer. Alors que les attentes et les pressions pour l’intégration rapide de technologies génétiques sont de plus en plus élevées sur le système de santé québécois, l’absence de planification et de mécanisme de translation de ces technologies font craindre une translation et une utilisation inadéquates. Objectifs : Un premier objectif est d’éclairer et d’enrichir sur les conditions d’utilisation et de translation ainsi que sur les enjeux associés aux tests de pharmacogénétique dans le contexte québécois. Un deuxième objectif est de cerner ce qui est véhiculé sur la PGt dans différentes sources, dont les médias. Il ne s’agit pas d’évaluer si la pharmacogénétique devrait être intégrée dans la clinique, mais de mettre en perspective les espoirs véhiculés et la réalité du terrain. Ceci afin d’orienter la réflexion quant au développement de mécanismes de translation efficients et de politiques associées. Méthodologie : L’analyse des discours de plusieurs sources documentaires (n=167) du Québec et du Canada (1990-2005) et d’entretiens avec des experts québécois (n=19) a été effectuée. Quatre thèmes ont été analysés : 1) le positionnement et les perceptions envers la pharmacogénétique; 2) les avantages et les risques reliés à son utilisation; 3) les rôles et les tensions entre professionnels; 4) les barrières et les solutions de translation. Résultats : L’analyse des représentations véhiculées sur la pharmacogénétique dans les sources documentaires se cristallise autour de deux pôles. Les représentations optimistes qui révèlent une fascination envers la médecine personnalisée, créant des attentes (« Génohype ») en regard de l’arrivée de la pharmacogénétique dans la clinique. Les représentations pessimistes qui révèlent un scepticisme (« Génomythe ») envers l’arrivée de la pharmacogénétique et qui semblent imprégnés par l’historique des représentations médiatiques négatives de la génétique. Quant à l’analyse des entretiens, celle-ci a permis de mettre en lumière le contexte actuel du terrain d’accueil. En effet, selon les experts interviewés, ce contexte comporte des déficiences législatives et un dysfonctionnement organisationnel qui font en sorte que l’utilisation des tests de pharmacogénétique est limitée, fragmentée et non standardisée. S’ajoute à ceci, le manque de données probantes et de dialogue entre des acteurs mal ou peu informés, la résistance et la crainte de certains professionnels. Discussion : Plusieurs changements dans la réglementation des systèmes d’innovation ainsi que dans le contexte d’accueil seront nécessaires pour rendre accessibles les tests de pharmacogénétique dans la pratique clinique courante. Des mécanismes facilitateurs de la translation des technologies et des facteurs clés de réussite sont proposés. Enfin, quelques initiatives phares sont suggérées. Conclusion : Des efforts au niveau international, national, provincial et local sont indispensables afin de résoudre les nombreux obstacles de la translation des tests de pharmacogénétique au Québec et ainsi planifier l’avenir le plus efficacement et sûrement possible.Problematic: The advent of pharmacogenetic testing was heralded in the media and in scientific literature as a revolution and the dawn of a new era of personalized medicine. This revolution has yet to arrive. The literature describes several legislative, scientific, professional and ethical barriers that are causing a delay in the translation of pharmacogenetic testing into clinical practice. In Quebec, is there optimism about pharmacogenetics and do these barriers exist? And in what context is the integration of pharmacogenetic testing taking place? At present, these questions remain unanswered. Yet they are of critical importance. While there are growing expectations and pressure on the Quebec health system to rapidly incorporate genetic technology, the lack of planning and of mechanisms for the translation of this technology may jeopardize its adequate transfer and use. Objectives: The first objective was to gain clearer and fuller insight and understanding into the conditions of use and translation of pharmacogenetic testing in Quebec and its related issues. The second was to identify the message being conveyed about pharmacogenetics in various sources, including the media. The issue at hand was not whether pharmacogenetics should or should not be integrated into clinical practice, but rather to put into perspective the hopes being set forth regarding pharmacogenetics and the realistic nature of the enterprise. The purpose of the exercise was to provide a framework for thinking about the development of efficient translation mechanisms and the policies associated with it. Methodology: Discourse analyses of several documentary sources (n=167) in Quebec and Canada (1990-2005) and interviews with Quebec experts (n=19) were conducted. Four themes were explored: 1) the positioning and perception of pharmacogenetics; 2)the advantages and risks associated with its use; 3) the roles of various professionals and the tensions that exist among them; 4) the barriers and solutions to translation. Results: Analysis of the representations of pharmacogenetics in the documentary sources revealed a divide between two distinct poles. On the one hand, the optimistic representations showed a fascination with personalized medicine, creating expectations (“Genohype”) regarding the introduction of pharmacogenetics to the clinical setting. On the other hand, the highly sceptical pessimistic representations (“Genomyth”) of pharmacogenetics seemed to be permeated by the history of negative media representations of genetics. Furthermore, analyses of the interviews shed light on the current social, political and clinical context. In fact, according to the experts interviewed, this context is characterized by legislative shortcomings and a dysfunctional organizational structure, which have led to a limited, fragmented and non-standardized use of pharmacogenetic testing. Added to this is a lack of clinical data, an absence of communication among various ill-informed or uninformed players and both resistance and fear among certain professionals. Discussion: Many regulatory changes to the innovation system and current context are needed to ensure access to pharmacogenetic testing in the present clinical setting. Mechanisms to facilitate the translation of technology and the key factors needed for success are also described. Finally, several flagship initiatives are suggested. Conclusion: International, national, provincial and local efforts are required to overcome the various barriers to the translation of pharmacogenetic testing into clinical practice in Quebec and thus plan the future in the safest, most efficient manner possible

3D Cohort Study : The Integrated Research Network in Perinatology of Quebec and Eastern Ontario

Background: The 3D Cohort Study (Design, Develop, Discover) was established to help bridge knowledge gaps about the links between various adverse exposures during pregnancy with birth outcomes and later health outcomes in children. Methods: Pregnant women and their partners were recruited during the first trimester from nine sites in Quebec and followed along with their children through to 2 years of age. Questionnaires were administered during pregnancy and post-delivery to collect information on demographics, mental health and life style, medical history, psychosocial measures, diet, infant growth, and neurodevelopment. Information on the delivery and newborn outcomes were abstracted from medical charts. Biological specimens were collected from mothers during each trimester, fathers (once during the pregnancy), and infants (at delivery and 2 years of age) for storage in a biological specimen bank. Results: Of the 9864 women screened, 6348 met the eligibility criteria and 2366 women participated in the study (37% of eligible women). Among women in the 3D cohort, 1721 of their partners (1704 biological fathers) agreed to participate (73%). Two thousand two hundred and nineteen participants had a live singleton birth (94%). Prenatal blood and urine samples as well as vaginal secretions were collected for ≥98% of participants, cord blood for 81% of livebirths, and placental tissue for 89% of livebirths. Conclusions: The 3D Cohort Study combines a rich bank of multiple biological specimens with extensive clinical, life style, and psychosocial data. This data set is a valuable resource for studying the developmental etiology of birth and early childhood neurodevelopmental outcomes

Pharmacogenomics of the efficacy and safety of Colchicine in COLCOT

© 2021 The Authors. Circulation: Genomic and Precision Medicine is published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.Background: The randomized, placebo-controlled COLCOT (Colchicine Cardiovascular Outcomes Trial) has shown the benefits of colchicine 0.5 mg daily to lower the rate of ischemic cardiovascular events in patients with a recent myocardial infarction. Here, we conducted a post hoc pharmacogenomic study of COLCOT with the aim to identify genetic predictors of the efficacy and safety of treatment with colchicine. Methods: There were 1522 participants of European ancestry from the COLCOT trial available for the pharmacogenomic study of COLCOT trial. The pharmacogenomic study's primary cardiovascular end point was defined as for the main trial, as time to first occurrence of cardiovascular death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, stroke, or urgent hospitalization for angina requiring coronary revascularization. The safety end point was time to the first report of gastrointestinal events. Patients' DNA was genotyped using the Illumina Global Screening array followed by imputation. We performed a genome-wide association study in colchicine-treated patients. Results: None of the genetic variants passed the genome-wide association study significance threshold for the primary cardiovascular end point conducted in 702 patients in the colchicine arm who were compliant to medication. The genome-wide association study for gastrointestinal events was conducted in all 767 patients in the colchicine arm and found 2 significant association signals, one with lead variant rs6916345 (hazard ratio, 1.89 [95% CI, 1.52-2.35], P=7.41×10-9) in a locus which colocalizes with Crohn disease, and one with lead variant rs74795203 (hazard ratio, 2.51 [95% CI, 1.82-3.47]; P=2.70×10-8), an intronic variant in gene SEPHS1. The interaction terms between the genetic variants and treatment with colchicine versus placebo were significant. Conclusions: We found 2 genomic regions associated with gastrointestinal events in patients treated with colchicine. Those findings will benefit from replication to confirm that some patients may have genetic predispositions to lower tolerability of treatment with colchicine.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

A discrete event simulation model to assess the economic value of a hypothetical pharmacogenomics test for statin-induced myopathy in patients initiating a statin in secondary cardiovascular prevention

Background Statin (HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor) therapy is the mainstay dyslipidemia treatment and reduces the risk of a cardiovascular (CV) event (CVE) by up to 35%. However, adherence to statin therapy is poor. One reason patients discontinue statin therapy is musculoskeletal pain and the associated risk of rhabdomyolysis. Research is ongoing to develop a pharmacogenomics (PGx) test for statin-induced myopathy as an alternative to the current diagnosis method, which relies on creatine kinase levels. The potential economic value of a PGx test for statin-induced myopathy is unknown. Methods We developed a lifetime discrete event simulation (DES) model for patients 65 years of age initiating a statin after a first CVE consisting of either an acute myocardial infarction (AMI) or a stroke. The model evaluates the potential economic value of a hypothetical PGx test for diagnosing statin-induced myopathy. We have assessed the model over the spectrum of test sensitivity and specificity parameters. Results Our model showed that a strategy with a perfect PGx test had an incremental cost-utility ratio of 4273 Canadian dollars ($Can) per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). The probabilistic sensitivity analysis shows that when the payer willingness-to-pay per QALY reaches$Can12,000, the PGx strategy is favored in 90% of the model simulations. Conclusion We found that a strategy favoring patients staying on statin therapy is cost effective even if patients maintained on statin are at risk of rhabdomyolysis. Our results are explained by the fact that statins are highly effective in reducing the CV risk in patients at high CV risk, and this benefit largely outweighs the risk of rhabdomyolysis