ReviewMolecular biology reports2023
Current status of the analytical validation of next generation sequencing applications for pharmacogenetic profiling.
Review in Molecular biology reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeted adaptive sampling enables clinical pharmacogenomics testing and genome-wide genotyping.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Development and validation of a pharmacogenomics reporting workflow based on the illumina global screening array chip.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Clinical Implementation of Rare and NovelInternational journal of biological sciences · 2024Review
- Impact of Pharmacogenomics in Clinical Practice.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAnalytical validity is a prerequisite to use a next generation sequencing (NGS)-based application as an in vitro diagnostic test or a companion diagnostic in clinical practice. Currently, in the United States and the European Union, the intended use of such NGS-based tests does not refer to guided drug therapy on the basis of pharmacogenetic profiling of drug metabolizing enzymes, although the value of pharmacogenetic testing has been reported. However, in research, a large variety of NGS-based tests are used and have been confirmed to be at least comparable to array-based testing. METHODS AND
resultsA systematic evaluation was performed screening and assessing published literature on analytical validation of NGS applications for pharmacogenetic profiling of CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, VKORC1 and/or UGT1A1. Although NGS applications are also increasingly used for implementation assessments in clinical practice, we show in the present systematic literature evaluation that published information on the current status of analytical validation of NGS applications targeting drug metabolizing enzymes is scarce. Furthermore, a comprehensive performance evaluation of whole exome and whole genome sequencing with the intended use for pharmacogenetic profiling has not been published so far.
conclusionsA standard in reporting on analytical validation of NGS-based tests is not in place yet. Therefore, many relevant performance criteria are not addressed in published literature. For an appropriate analytical validation of an NGS-based qualitative test for pharmacogenetic profiling at least accuracy, precision, limit of detection and specificity should be addressed to facilitate the implementation of such tests in clinical use.
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.