42 research outputs found

    Clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guideline (CPIC) for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotypes and dosing of tricyclic antidepressants: 2016 update

    Get PDF
    CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 polymorphisms affect the exposure, efficacy and safety of tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), with some drugs being affected by CYP2D6 only (e.g., nortriptyline and desipramine) and others by both polymorphic enzymes (e.g., amitriptyline, clomipramine, doxepin, imipramine, and trimipramine). Evidence is presented for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotype-directed dosing of TCAs. This document is an update to the 2012 Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 Genotypes and Dosing of Tricyclic Antidepressants

    Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 Genotypes and Dosing of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors

    Get PDF
    Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) are primary treatment options for major depressive and anxiety disorders. CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 polymorphisms can influence the metabolism of SSRIs, thereby affecting drug efficacy and safety. We summarize evidence from the published literature supporting these associations and provide dosing recommendations for fluvoxamine, paroxetine, citalopram, escitalopram, and sertraline based on CYP2D6 and/or CYP2C19 genotype (updates at www.pharmgkb.org)

    Multi-site investigation of strategies for the clinical implementation of CYP2D6 genotyping to guide drug prescribing

    Get PDF
    PURPOSE: A number of institutions have clinically implemented CYP2D6 genotyping to guide drug prescribing. We compared implementation strategies of early adopters of CYP2D6 testing, barriers faced by both early adopters and institutions in the process of implementing CYP2D6 testing, and approaches taken to overcome these barriers. METHODS: We surveyed eight early adopters of CYP2D6 genotyping and eight institutions in the process of adoption. Data were collected on testing approaches, return of results procedures, applications of genotype results, challenges faced, and lessons learned. RESULTS: Among early adopters, CYP2D6 testing was most commonly ordered to assist with opioid and antidepressant prescribing. Key differences among programs included test ordering and genotyping approaches, result reporting, and clinical decision support. However, all sites tested for copy-number variation and nine common variants, and reported results in the medical record. Most sites provided automatic consultation and had designated personnel to assist with genotype-informed therapy recommendations. Primary challenges were related to stakeholder support, CYP2D6 gene complexity, phenotype assignment, and sustainability. CONCLUSION: There are specific challenges unique to CYP2D6 testing given the complexity of the gene and its relevance to multiple medications. Consensus lessons learned may guide those interested in pursuing similar clinical pharmacogenetic programs

    Multisite evaluation of institutional processes and implementation determinants for pharmacogenetic testing to guide antidepressant therapy.

    Get PDF
    There is growing interest in utilizing pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing to guide antidepressant use, but there is lack of clarity on how to implement testing into clinical practice. We administered two surveys at 17 sites that had implemented or were in the process of implementing PGx testing for antidepressants. Survey 1 collected data on the process and logistics of testing. Survey 2 asked sites to rank the importance of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs using best-worst scaling choice experiments. Of the 17 sites, 13 had implemented testing and four were in the planning stage. Thirteen offered testing in the outpatient setting, and nine in both outpatient/inpatient settings. PGx tests were mainly ordered by psychiatry (92%) and primary care (69%) providers. CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 were the most commonly tested genes. The justification for antidepressants selected for PGx guidance was based on Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines (94%) and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA; 75.6%) guidance. Both institutional (53%) and commercial laboratories (53%) were used for testing. Sites varied on the methods for returning results to providers and patients. Sites were consistent in ranking CFIR constructs and identified patient needs/resources, leadership engagement, intervention knowledge/beliefs, evidence strength and quality, and the identification of champions as most important for implementation. Sites deployed similar implementation strategies and measured similar outcomes. The process of implementing PGx testing to guide antidepressant therapy varied across sites, but key drivers for successful implementation were similar and may help guide other institutions interested in providing PGx-guided pharmacotherapy for antidepressant management

    Prescribing Prevalence of Medications With Potential Genotype-Guided Dosing in Pediatric Patients

    Get PDF
    Importance: Genotype-guided prescribing in pediatrics could prevent adverse drug reactions and improve therapeutic response. Clinical pharmacogenetic implementation guidelines are available for many medications commonly prescribed to children. Frequencies of medication prescription and actionable genotypes (genotypes where a prescribing change may be indicated) inform the potential value of pharmacogenetic implementation. Objective: To assess potential opportunities for genotype-guided prescribing in pediatric populations among multiple health systems by examining the prevalence of prescriptions for each drug with the highest level of evidence (Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium level A) and estimating the prevalence of potential actionable prescribing decisions. Design, setting, and participants: This serial cross-sectional study of prescribing prevalences in 16 health systems included electronic health records data from pediatric inpatient and outpatient encounters from January 1, 2011, to December 31, 2017. The health systems included academic medical centers with free-standing children's hospitals and community hospitals that were part of an adult health care system. Participants included approximately 2.9 million patients younger than 21 years observed per year. Data were analyzed from June 5, 2018, to April 14, 2020. Exposures: Prescription of 38 level A medications based on electronic health records. Main outcomes and measures: Annual prevalence of level A medication prescribing and estimated actionable exposures, calculated by combining estimated site-year prevalences across sites with each site weighted equally. Results: Data from approximately 2.9 million pediatric patients (median age, 8 [interquartile range, 2-16] years; 50.7% female, 62.3% White) were analyzed for a typical calendar year. The annual prescribing prevalence of at least 1 level A drug ranged from 7987 to 10 629 per 100 000 patients with increasing trends from 2011 to 2014. The most prescribed level A drug was the antiemetic ondansetron (annual prevalence of exposure, 8107 [95% CI, 8077-8137] per 100 000 children). Among commonly prescribed opioids, annual prevalence per 100 000 patients was 295 (95% CI, 273-317) for tramadol, 571 (95% CI, 557-586) for codeine, and 2116 (95% CI, 2097-2135) for oxycodone. The antidepressants citalopram, escitalopram, and amitriptyline were also commonly prescribed (annual prevalence, approximately 250 per 100 000 patients for each). Estimated prevalences of actionable exposures were highest for oxycodone and ondansetron (>300 per 100 000 patients annually). CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 substrates were more frequently prescribed than medications influenced by other genes. Conclusions and relevance: These findings suggest that opportunities for pharmacogenetic implementation among pediatric patients in the US are abundant. As expected, the greatest opportunity exists with implementing CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 pharmacogenetic guidance for commonly prescribed antiemetics, analgesics, and antidepressants

    SCF ubiquitin ligase-targeted therapies

    No full text
    The clinical successes of proteasome inhibitors for the treatment of cancer have highlighted the therapeutic potential of targeting this protein degradation system. However, proteasome inhibitors prevent the degradation of numerous proteins, which may cause adverse effects. Increased specificity could be achieved by inhibiting the components of the ubiquitin-proteasome system that target specific subsets of proteins for degradation. F-box proteins are the substrate-targeting subunits of SKP1-CUL1-F-box protein (SCF) ubiquitin ligase complexes. Through the degradation of a plethora of diverse substrates, SCF ubiquitin ligases control a multitude of processes at the cellular and organismal levels, and their dysregulation is implicated in many pathologies. SCF ubiquitin ligases are characterized by their high specificity for substrates, and these ligases therefore represent promising drug targets. However, the potential for therapeutic manipulation of SCF complexes remains an underdeveloped area. This Review explores and discusses potential strategies to target SCF-mediated biological processes to treat human diseases

    Mechanisms and function of substrate recruitment by F-box proteins

    No full text
    S phase kinase-associated protein 1 (SKP1)-cullin 1 (CUL1)-F-box protein (SCF) ubiquitin ligase complexes use a family of F-box proteins as substrate adaptors to mediate the degradation of a large number of regulatory proteins involved in diverse processes. The dysregulation of SCF complexes and their substrates contributes to multiple pathologies. In the 14 years since the identification and annotation of the F-box protein family, the continued identification and characterization of novel substrates has greatly expanded our knowledge of the regulation of substrate targeting and the roles of F-box proteins in biological processes. Here, we focus on the evolution of our understanding of substrate recruitment by F-box proteins, the dysregulation of substrate recruitment in disease and potential avenues for F-box protein-directed disease therapies
    corecore