Towards the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics in bipolar disorder.

BackgroundBipolar disorder (BD) is a psychiatric illness defined by pathological alterations between the mood states of mania and depression, causing disability, imposing healthcare costs and elevating the risk of suicide. Although effective treatments for BD exist, variability in outcomes leads to a large number of treatment failures, typically followed by a trial and error process of medication switches that can take years. Pharmacogenetic testing (PGT), by tailoring drug choice to an individual, may personalize and expedite treatment so as to identify more rapidly medications well suited to individual BD patients.DiscussionA number of associations have been made in BD between medication response phenotypes and specific genetic markers. However, to date clinical adoption of PGT has been limited, often citing questions that must be answered before it can be widely utilized. These include: What are the requirements of supporting evidence? How large is a clinically relevant effect? What degree of specificity and sensitivity are required? Does a given marker influence decision making and have clinical utility? In many cases, the answers to these questions remain unknown, and ultimately, the question of whether PGT is valid and useful must be determined empirically. Towards this aim, we have reviewed the literature and selected drug-genotype associations with the strongest evidence for utility in BD.SummaryBased upon these findings, we propose a preliminary panel for use in PGT, and a method by which the results of a PGT panel can be integrated for clinical interpretation. Finally, we argue that based on the sufficiency of accumulated evidence, PGT implementation studies are now warranted. We propose and discuss the design for a randomized clinical trial to test the use of PGT in the treatment of BD

The PedsQL™ as a patient-reported outcome in children and adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: a population-based study

BACKGROUND: Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is the most common chronic mental health condition in children and adolescents. The application of health-related quality of life (HRQOL) as a pediatric population health measure may facilitate risk assessment and resource allocation, the identification of health disparities, and the determination of health outcomes from interventions and policy decisions for children and adolescents with ADHD at the local community, state, and national health level. METHODS: An analysis from an existing statewide database to determine the feasibility, reliability, and validity of the 23-item PedsQL™ 4.0 (Pediatric Quality of Life Inventory™) Generic Core Scales as a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure of pediatric population health for children and adolescents with ADHD. The PedsQL™ 4.0 Generic Core Scales (Physical, Emotional, Social, School Functioning) were completed by families through a statewide mail survey to evaluate the HRQOL of new enrollees in the State of California State's Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Seventy-two children ages 5–16 self-reported their HRQOL. RESULTS: The PedsQL™ 4.0 evidenced minimal missing responses, achieved excellent reliability for the Total Scale Score (α = 0.92 child self-report, 0.92 parent proxy-report), and distinguished between healthy children and children with ADHD. Children with ADHD self-reported severely impaired psychosocial functioning, comparable to children with newly-diagnosed cancer and children with cerebral palsy. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that population health monitoring may identify children with ADHD at risk for adverse HRQOL. The implications of measuring pediatric HRQOL for evaluating the population health outcomes of children with ADHD internationally are discussed

IEEE journal of emerging and selected topics in power electronics

What happens when men are the subjects of research? Gender and other forms of social difference are performed and negotiated in part through face-to-face interactions, including through such research methods as interviews and focus groups. When men or women conduct gender-conscious research with male research subjects, a host of issues are raised: practical, political and epistemological. This chapter explores three dimensions of face-to-face research among men