ArticleClinical and translational science2021
Retrospective Review of Pharmacogenetic Testing at an Academic Children's Hospital.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 24 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Scoping review of precision child and youth mental health research: dwelling in possibility.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Critically Ill Children Frequently Receive Medications with Established but Unused Pharmacogenomic Guidelines: Actionable Findings from an Integrated Electronic Medical Record and Exome Sequencing Study.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Utilisation of drugs with pharmacogenetic recommendations in children in Switzerland.The pharmacogenomics journal · 2025Article
- Real-World Utilization of Medications With Pharmacogenetic Recommendations in Older Adults: A Scoping Review.Clinical and translational science · 2025Article
- Retrospective evaluation of a machine learning model to facilitate pharmacogenetic testing.BMJ digital health & AI · 2025Article
- Using Precision Medicine to Disentangle Genotype-Phenotype Relationships in Twins with Rett Syndrome: A Case Report.Current issues in molecular biology · 2024Article
- Co-Occurring Methylenetetrahydrofolate Reductase (Brain sciences · 2024Article
- Estimation of the benefit from pre-emptive genotyping based on the nationwide cohort data in South Korea.Clinical and translational science · 2024Review
- Challenges of pediatric pharmacotherapy: A narrative review of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacogenetics.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2024Review
- Translating Precision Health for Pediatrics: A Scoping Review.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Pharmacogenomics and health disparities, are we helping?Frontiers in genetics · 2023Review
- Case report: Use of therapeutic drug monitoring and pharmacogenetic testing as opportunities to individualize care in a case of flecainide toxicity after fetal supraventricular tachycardia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Practice of CYP450 genotyping and phenotyping in children in a real-life setting.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Pharmacogenomics for Drug Dosing in Children: Current Use, Knowledge, and Gaps.Journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Article
- Adolescent perceptions of pharmacogenetic testing.Pharmacogenomics · 2021Article
- Providers' perspectives on the clinical utility of pharmacogenomic testing in pediatric patients.Pharmacogenomics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
There is limited evidence to support pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing in children. We conducted a retrospective review of PGx testing among 452 patients at an academic children's hospital to determine the potential utility of PGx in diseases of childhood and to identify targets for future pediatric pharmacogenetic research. An actionable gene-drug pair associated with the 28 genes tested (Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) level A or B, Pharmacogenomics Knowledge Base (PharmGKB) level 1A or B, or US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recommendation and a PharmGKB level) was present in 98.7% of patients. We identified 203 actionable gene-drug-diagnosis groups based on the indications for each actionable drug listed in Lexicomp. Among patients with an actionable gene-drug-diagnosis group, 49.3% had a diagnosis where the drug was a therapeutic option and PGx could be used to guide treatment selection. Among patients with an associated diagnosis, 30.9% had a prescription for the actionable drug allowing PGx guided dosing. Three genes (CYP2C19, CYP2D6, and CYP3A5) accounted for all the gene-drug-diagnosis groups with matching diagnoses and prescriptions. The most common gene-drug-diagnosis groups with matching diagnoses and prescriptions were CYP2C19-citalopram-escitalopram-depression 3.3% of patients tested; CYP2C19-dexlansoprazole-gastritis-esophagitis 3.1%; CYP2C19-omeprazole-gastritis-esophagitis 2.4%; CYP2D6-atomoxetine-attention deficit hyperactivity disorder 2.2%; and CYP2C19-citalopram-escitalopram-obsessive-compulsive disorder 1.5%. PGx could be used to guide selection of current treatment options or medication dosing in almost half (48.7%) of pediatric patients tested. Mood disorders and gastritis/esophagitis are promising targets for future study of PGx testing because of the high prevalence of these diagnoses and associated actionable gene-drug pairs in the pediatric population.
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.