SynthesisBMC health services research2021
Pharmacogenetic testing for adverse drug reaction prevention: systematic review of economic evaluations and the appraisal of quality matters for clinical practice and implementation.
Synthesis in BMC health services research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- BioFRAM PGx, an Implementation Proposal for Pharmacogenetics in the Spanish National Health System.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Economic Evaluation of Pre-emptive Pharmacogenetic Panel Testing versus No Genetic Testing in a Multi-ethnic Asian Population.PharmacoEconomics · 2026Article
- Pharmacogenetics in Community Pharmacy: Global Perspectives and Implementation.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Article
- Gut Microbiota and Postbiotic Metabolites: Biotic Intervention for Enhancing Vaccine Responses and Personalized Medicine for Disease Prevention.Probiotics and antimicrobial proteins · 2026Review
- Pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing in Italy: a review of evidence and multidisciplinary consensus on key priorities for implementation.Frontiers in public health · 2026Review
- Clinical Pharmacogenetics: Results After Implementation of Preemptive Tests in Daily Routine.Journal of personalized medicine · 2025Article
- The history and future of pharmacogenetics in Aotearoa/New Zealand.Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand · 2025Review
- Cardiovascular precision medicine - A pharmacogenomic perspective.Cambridge prisms. Precision medicine · 2023Review
- Advancing pharmacogenetic testing in a tertiary hospital: a retrospective analysis after 10 years of activity.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
- Direct Oral Anticoagulants (DOAC): Are We Ready for a Pharmacogenetic Approach?Journal of 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
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenetic testing has potential roles in identifying whether an individual would have risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from a particular medicine. Robust cost-effectiveness results on genetic testing would be useful for clinical practice and policy decision-making on allocating resources effectively. This study aimed to update a systematic review on economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to prevent ADRs and critically appraise the quality of reporting and sources of evidence for model input parameters.
methodsWe searched studies through Medline via PubMed, Scopus and CRD's NHS Economic Evaluation up to October 2019. Studies investigating polymorphism-based pharmacogenetic testing, which guided drug therapies to prevent ADRs, using economic evaluation methods were included. Two reviewers independently performed data extraction and assessed the quality of reporting using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) guidelines and the quality of data sources using the hierarchy of evidence developed by Cooper et al.
resultsFifty-nine economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing to avoid drug-induced ADRs were found between 2002 and 2018. Cost-utility and cost-effectiveness analyses were the most common methods of economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing. Most studies complied with the CHEERS checklist, except for single study-based economic evaluations which did not report uncertainty analysis (78%). There was a lack of high-quality evidence not only for estimating the clinical effectiveness of pharmacogenetic testing, but also baseline clinical data. About 14% of the studies obtained clinical effectiveness data of testing from a meta-analysis of case-control studies with direct comparison, which was not listed in the hierarchy of evidence used.
conclusionsOur review suggested that future single study-based economic evaluations of pharmacogenetic testing should report uncertainty analysis, as this could significantly affect the robustness of economic evaluation results. A specific ranking system for the quality of evidence is needed for the economic evaluation of pharmacogenetic testing of ADRs. Differences in parameters, methods and outcomes across studies, as well as population-level and system-level differences, may lead to the difficulty of comparing cost-effectiveness results across countries.
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.