ArticleNPJ genomic medicine2020
Prevalence and types of inconsistencies in clinical pharmacogenetic recommendations among major U.S. sources.
Article in NPJ genomic medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
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.
- Recommendations for pharmacogenetic testing in clinical practice guidelines in the US.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2024Review
- ADME Gene-Related Pharmacogenomic Labeling of FDA-Approved Drugs: Comparison with Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Evidence Levels.Medicines (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Comparing commercial pharmacogenetic testing results and recommendations for antidepressants with established CPIC guidelines.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Forging the path to precision medicine in Qatar: a public health perspective on pharmacogenomics initiatives.Frontiers in public health · 2024Review
- An Introductory Tutorial on Cardiovascular Pharmacogenetics for Healthcare Providers.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2023Article
- Toward Integration of Pharmacogenomic Tests into Daily Clinical Practice: A General Survey for Polish Healthcare Workers.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2023Article
- Cardiovascular precision medicine - A pharmacogenomic perspective.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2023Review
- Reimbursement of pharmacogenetic tests at a tertiary academic medical center in the United States.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- PAnno: A pharmacogenomics annotation tool for clinical genomic testing.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Pharmacogenomics in Psychiatry Practice: The Value and the Challenges.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Review
- Modern developments in germline pharmacogenomics for oncology prescribing.CA: a cancer journal for clinicians · 2022Review
- Comparison of FDA Table of Pharmacogenetic Associations and Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2022Article
- Clinical Opportunities for Germline Pharmacogenetics and Management of Drug-Drug Interactions in Patients With Advanced Solid Cancers.JCO precision oncology · 2022Article
- Article
- Moving Pharmacogenetics Into Practice: It's All About the Evidence!Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2021Review
- Strategies to Improve the Clinical Outcomes for Direct-to-Consumer Pharmacogenomic Tests.Genes · 2021Review
- Independent Community Pharmacists' Experience in Offering Pharmacogenetic Testing.Pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics (PGx) is slow. Previous studies have identified some inconsistencies among clinical PGx recommendations, but the prevalence and types of inconsistencies have not been comprehensively analyzed among major PGx guidance sources in the U.S. PGx recommendations from the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium, U.S. Food and Drug Administration drug labels, and major U.S. professional medical organizations were analyzed through May 24, 2019. Inconsistencies were analyzed within the following elements: recommendation category; whether routine screening was recommended; and the specific biomarkers, variants, and patient groups involved. We identified 606 total clinical PGx recommendations, which contained 267 unique drugs. Composite inconsistencies occurred in 48.1% of clinical PGx recommendations overall, and in 93.3% of recommendations from three sources. Inconsistencies occurred in the recommendation category (29.8%), the patient group (35.4%), and routine screening (15.2%). In conclusion, almost one-half of clinical PGx recommendations from prominent U.S. guidance sources contain inconsistencies, which can potentially slow clinical implementation.
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.