Trial reportPharmacogenetics and genomics2013
Predictors of consent to pharmacogenomics testing in the IDEAL study.
Trial report in Pharmacogenetics and genomics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The role of race and ethnicity in views toward and participation in genetic studies and precision medicine research in the United States: A systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2020Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionPharmacogenomic testing is important in developing individualized therapeutic approaches. In the phase 3 IDEAL (Individualized Dosing to Assess Optimal Pegylated Interferon Therapy) clinical trial, a subset of patients receiving peginterferon and ribavirin for treatment of chronic hepatitis C agreed to provide blood samples for genetic testing. Genome-wide association studies subsequently identified associations between IL28B polymorphism and sustained virologic response, and ITPA polymorphism and ribavirin-associated anemia.
objectiveTo characterize the groups of patients who accepted or declined pharmacogenomic testing in the IDEAL study.
methodsClinical and demographic factors and treatment outcomes were compared at all sites that had approved pharmacogenomic testing. Differences between patients who consented to and declined pharmacogenomic testing were analyzed using Student's t-test and χ²-test.
resultsIn total, 109 of 118 sites participated in the pharmacogenomic substudy, and 1674 of 2949 (57%) patients enrolled at these sites consented to pharmacogenomic testing. More patients treated in academic medical centers than in community centers (60 vs. 52%, P<0.001) provided consent. More men than women (58 vs. 54%, P=0.04) consented to pharmacogenomic testing. There was no significant difference in pharmacogenomic participation between patients from different racial groups, including whites and African Americans (58 vs. 54%, P=0.07). Treatment outcomes were also similar according to pharmacogenomic participation.
conclusionIn the IDEAL study, patient consent to pharmacogenomic testing did not introduce selection bias. Treatment at an academic center and male sex were associated with higher rates of pharmacogenomic testing consent. Efficacy and safety outcomes were similar in patients who accepted and declined pharmacogenomic testing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.