ArticleClinical and translational science2023
Comparison of variants in TPMT and NUDT15 between sequencing and genotyping methods in a multistate pediatric institution.
Article in Clinical and translational science, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Validation of diagnostic screening test for pharmacogenomic targets for thiopurine drugs in indian pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia patients.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Article
- Comparison of variants in TPMT and NUDT15 between sequencing and genotyping methods in a multistate pediatric institution.Clinical and translational science · 2023Article
- From bench to bedside: a spotlight on pharmacogenomics at Nemours Children's Health.PharmacogenomicsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The risk of severe adverse events related to thiopurine therapy can be reduced by personalizing dosing based on TPMT and NUDT15 genetic polymorphisms. However, the optimal genetic testing platform has not yet been established. In this study, we report on the TPMT and NUDT15 genotypes and phenotypes generated from 320 patients from a multicenter pediatric healthcare system using both Sanger sequencing and polymerase chain reaction genotyping (hereafter: genotyping) methods to determine the appropriateness of genotyping in our patient population. Sanger sequencing identified variant TPMT alleles including *3A (8, 3.2% of alleles), *3C (4, 1.6%), and *2 (1, 0.4%), and NUDT15 alleles including *2 (5, 3.6%) and *3 (1, 0.7%). For genotyped patients, variants identified in TPMT included *3A (12, 3.1%), *3C (4, 1%), *2 (2, 0.5%), and *8 (1, 0.25%), whereas NUDT15 included *4 (2, 1.9%) and *2 or *3 (1, 1%). Between Sanger sequencing and genotyping, no significant difference in allele, genotype, or phenotype frequency was identified for either TPMT or NUDT15. All patients who were tested using Sanger sequencing would have been accurately phenotyped for either TPMT (124/124), NUDT15 (69/69), or both genes (68/68) if they were assayed using the genotyping method. Considering 193 total TPMT and NUDT15 Sanger Sequencing tests reviewed, all tests would have resulted in an appropriate clinical recommendation if the test had instead been conducted using the comparison genotyping platforms. These results suggest that, in this study population, genotyping would be sufficient to provide accurate phenotype calls and clinical recommendations.
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.