Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39981562›Full record

ArticlePharmacogenomics2024

Comparing the clinical utility of pharmacogenomic genotyping and next generation sequencing in a military health system adult medicine clinic.

David Saunders, Lydia D Hellwig, Austin Pagani, Mauricio De Castro, Mark Haigney, Lucas Poon, Nate Ehat, Andrew Heroy, Joya Libbus, Keiko Fox and 6 more

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Pharmacogenomics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

David SaundersDepartment of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Lydia D HellwigDepartment of Pediatrics, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Austin PaganiDepartment of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Mauricio De CastroDefense Health Agency Genetics Reference Laboratory, Keesler AFB, MS, USA.
Mark HaigneyDepartment of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Lucas PoonDepartment of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Nate EhatMilitary Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Andrew HeroyMilitary Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Joya LibbusMilitary Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Keiko FoxMilitary Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Sachi KalraMilitary Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Thomas B ArnoldMilitary Cardiovascular Outcomes Research program, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Clesson TurnerNational Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA.
John Logan BlackDivision of Laboratory Genetics and Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Steven E SchererBaylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA.
Ann M MoyerDivision of Laboratory Genetics and Genomics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionPharmacogenetic (PGx) screening is intended to optimize drug efficacy and reduce adverse drug reactions. Current screening options include genotyping assays for preselected PGx variants and broader next-generation sequencing panels (NGS). Few studies have directly compared preemptive PGx screening methods. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe two PGx methods were compared in a cross-sectional study of adult Military Health System (MHS) clinic beneficiaries. Participants had initial targeted CYP2C19/CYP2D6 genotyping at a Military Health System Laboratory. Genotyping was followed by multi-gene NGS testing. Current prescriptions were recorded and potential drug-drug interactions screened to evaluate prescribing risk.

resultsAll participants (100%) had at least one clinically actionable NGS panel result compared to 81% with targeted CYP2C19/CYP2D6 genotyping. Participants (

conclusionsPreemptive multi-gene NGS detected more clinically actionable PGx results than targeted

Indexed as

High-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingPharmacogeneticsPharmacogenomic TestingAdultCross-Sectional StudiesCytochrome P-450 CYP2C19Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6Drug InteractionsFemaleGenotypeHumansMaleMiddle AgedMilitary HealthMilitary MedicineYoung AdultCYP2C19 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP2C19Cytochrome P-450 CYP2D6drug–drug interactionsdrug–gene interactionsmedication safetyPharmacogenomicspreemptive genomic screening

Identifiers

PMID39981562
PMCPMC11901368

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.