-
Value in Health : the Journal of the... Jan 2020Monoclonal antibodies against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have proved beneficial for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), particularly when...
BACKGROUND
Monoclonal antibodies against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) have proved beneficial for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), particularly when combined with predictive biomarkers of response. International guidelines recommend anti-EGFR therapy only for RAS (NRAS,KRAS) wild-type tumors because tumors with RAS mutations are unlikely to benefit.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to review the cost-effectiveness of RAS testing in mCRC patients before anti-EGFR therapy and to assess how well economic evaluations adhere to guidelines.
METHODS
A systematic review of full economic evaluations comparing RAS testing with no testing was performed for articles published in English between 2000 and 2018. Study quality was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies scale, and the British Medical Journal and the Philips checklists.
RESULTS
Six economic evaluations (2 cost-effectiveness analyses, 2 cost-utility analyses, and 2 combined cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses) were included. All studies were of good quality and adopted the perspective of the healthcare system/payer; accordingly, only direct medical costs were considered. Four studies presented testing strategies with a favorable incremental cost-effectiveness ratio under the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (£20 000-£30 000/QALY) and the US ($50 000-$100 000/QALY) thresholds.
CONCLUSIONS
Testing mCRC patients for RAS status and administering EGFR inhibitors only to patients with RAS wild-type tumors is a more cost-effective strategy than treating all patients without testing. The treatment of mCRC is becoming more personalized, which is essential to avoid inappropriate therapy and unnecessarily high healthcare costs. Future economic assessments should take into account other parameters that reflect the real world (eg, NRAS mutation analysis, toxicity of biological agents, genetic test sensitivity and specificity).
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents, Immunological; Clinical Decision-Making; Colorectal Neoplasms; Cost-Benefit Analysis; DNA Mutational Analysis; Drug Costs; ErbB Receptors; Genes, ras; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Health Care Costs; Humans; Mutation; Neoplasm Metastasis; Patient Selection; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Pharmacogenomic Variants; Phenotype; Precision Medicine; Predictive Value of Tests; Quality-Adjusted Life Years
PubMed: 31952666
DOI: 10.1016/j.jval.2019.07.009 -
Journal of Gastrointestinal and Liver... Jun 2020The coexistence of RAS and BRAF mutations is extremely rare, occurring in approximately 0.05% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Starting from a case...
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
The coexistence of RAS and BRAF mutations is extremely rare, occurring in approximately 0.05% of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Starting from a case presentation, this review aims to examine the prevalence, clinical, histopathological and molecular features of tumors with concomitant mutations.
METHODS
Case report and systematic review. We performed a systematic literature search in PubMed and EMBASE using the following MeSH terms: "coexistence" OR "concomitant" AND "RAS" AND "BRAF" AND "colorectal cancer" from the inception of the databases onwards.
RESULTS
We present the case of a 53-year-old man diagnosed with metastatic rectal adenocarcinoma with both a KRAS and a BRAF mutation. The review included eleven papers reporting on a total of 30 mCRC cases with concomitant RAS and BRAF mutations. The male/female ratio was 11/5. The average age was 58.5 years. The tumor was located in nine cases on the right colon and in two cases in the left colon. 43.3% of subjects had liver metastases, and 6.6% had lung metastases. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) was used in 36.6% of cases and polymerase chain reaction (PCR) in 16.6% of cases. KRAS mutations were present in 83.3% of patients and NRAS mutations in 16.6% of patients. Survival could be assessed in 10 patients and the median was 21.1 months (about 30% lower than the survival in the general mCRC population).
CONCLUSION
The results of this systematic review suggest the need to design a cohort study (either prospective or retrospective) to better characterize the patients with concomitant RAS and BRAF mutations and to establish the optimal treatment for this rare situation.
Topics: Adenocarcinoma; Antineoplastic Protocols; Colorectal Neoplasms; Female; GTP Phosphohydrolases; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Liver Neoplasms; Lung Neoplasms; Male; Membrane Proteins; Middle Aged; Mutation; Neoplasm Metastasis; Neoplasm Staging; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf; Proto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras); Rectal Neoplasms; Rectum; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; Survival Analysis
PubMed: 32530992
DOI: 10.15403/jgld-1003 -
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Feb 2022Aminoglycosides are widely used antibiotics with notable side effects, such as nephrotoxicity, vestibulotoxicity, and sensorineural hearing loss (cochleotoxicity)....
Aminoglycosides are widely used antibiotics with notable side effects, such as nephrotoxicity, vestibulotoxicity, and sensorineural hearing loss (cochleotoxicity). MT-RNR1 is a gene that encodes the 12s rRNA subunit and is the mitochondrial homologue of the prokaryotic 16s rRNA. Some MT-RNR1 variants (i.e., m.1095T>C; m.1494C>T; m.1555A>G) more closely resemble the bacterial 16s rRNA subunit and result in increased risk of aminoglycoside-induced hearing loss. Use of aminoglycosides should be avoided in individuals with an MT-RNR1 variant associated with an increased risk of aminoglycoside-induced hearing loss unless the high risk of permanent hearing loss is outweighed by the severity of infection and safe or effective alternative therapies are not available. We summarize evidence from the literature supporting this association and provide therapeutic recommendations for the use of aminoglycosides based on MT-RNR1 genotype (updates at https://cpicpgx.org/guidelines/ and www.pharmgkb.org).
Topics: Aminoglycosides; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Decision-Making; Genotype; Hearing Loss, Sensorineural; Humans; Ototoxicity; Patient Safety; Pharmacogenetics; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Pharmacogenomic Variants; Predictive Value of Tests; RNA, Ribosomal; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34032273
DOI: 10.1002/cpt.2309 -
Ontario Health Technology Assessment... 2021Major depression is a substantial public health concern that can affect personal relationships, reduce people's ability to go to school or work, and lead to social...
BACKGROUND
Major depression is a substantial public health concern that can affect personal relationships, reduce people's ability to go to school or work, and lead to social isolation. Multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools can help predict which depression medications and dosages are most likely to result in a strong response to treatment or to have the lowest risk of adverse events on the basis of people's genes.We conducted a health technology assessment of multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools for people with major depression. Our assessment evaluated effectiveness, safety, cost-effectiveness, the budget impact of publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing, and patient preferences and values.
METHODS
We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized studies (RoBANS) and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria.We performed a systematic literature search of the economic evidence to review published cost-effectiveness studies on multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes a decision-support tool in people with major depression. We developed a state-transition model and conducted a probabilistic analysis to determine the incremental cost of multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing versus treatment as usual per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for people with major depression who had inadequate response to one or more antidepressant medications. In the reference case (with GeneSight-guided care), we considered a 1-year time horizon with an Ontario Ministry of Health perspective. We also estimated the 5-year budget impact of publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing for people with major depression in Ontario.To contextualize the potential value of multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools, we spoke with people who have major depression and their families.
RESULTS
We included 14 studies in the clinical evidence review that evaluated six multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests. Although all tests included decision-support tools, they otherwise differed greatly, as did study design, populations included in studies, and outcomes reported. Little or no improvement was observed on change in HAM-D17 depression score compared with treatment as usual for any test evaluated (GRADE: Low-Very Low). GeneSight- and NeuroIDgenetix-guided medication selection led to statistically significant improvements in response (GRADE: Low-Very Low) and remission (GRADE: Low-Very Low), while treatment guided by CNSdose led to significant improvement in remission rates (GRADE: Low), but the study did not report on response. Results were inconsistent and uncertain for the impact of Neuropharmagen, and no significant improvement was observed for Genecept or another unspecified test for either response or remission (GRADE: Low-Very Low). Neuropharmagen may reduce adverse events and CNSDose may reduce intolerability to medication, while no difference was observed in adverse events with GeneSight, Genecept, or another unspecified test (GRADE: Moderate-Very Low). No studies reported data on suicide, treatment adherence, relapse, recovery, or recurrence of depression symptoms.Our review included four model-based economic studies and found that multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing was associated with greater effectiveness and cost savings than treatment as usual, over long-term (i.e., 3-,5-year and lifetime) time horizons. Since none of the included studies was fully applicable to the Ontario health care system, we conducted a primary economic evaluation.Our reference case analysis over the 1-year time horizon found that multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing (with GeneSight) was associated with additional QALYs (0.03, 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.005; 0.072) and additional costs ($1,906, 95% Crl: $688; $3,360). An incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $60,564 per QALY gained. The probability of the intervention being cost-effective (vs. treatment as usual) was 36.8% at a willingness-to-pay amount of $50,000 per QALY (i.e., moderately likely not to be cost-effective), rising to 70.7% at a willingness-to-pay amount of $100,000 per QALY (i.e., moderately likely to be cost-effective). Evidence informing economic modeling of the reference case with GeneSight and other multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests was of low to very low quality, implying considerable uncertainty or low confidence in the effectiveness estimates. The price of the test, efficacy of the intervention on remission, time horizon, and analytic perspective were major determinants of the cost-effectiveness results. If the test price were assumed to be $2,162 (compared with $2,500 in the reference case), the intervention would be cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay amount of $50,000 per QALY; moreover, if the price decreased to $595, the intervention would be cost saving (or dominant) compared with treatment as usual.At an increasing uptake of 1% per year and a test price of $2,500, the annual budget impact of publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing in Ontario over the next 5 years ranged from an additional $3.5 million in year 1 (at uptake of 1%) to $16.8 million in year 5. The 5-year budget impact was estimated at about $52 million.People with major depression and caregivers generally supported multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing because they believed it could provide guidance that fit their values. They hoped such guidance would speed symptom relief, would reduce side effects and help inform their medication choices. Some patients expressed concerns over maintaining confidentiality of test results and the possibility that physicians would sacrifice patient-centred care to follow pharmacogenomic guidance.
CONCLUSIONS
Multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools to guide medication selection for depression varies widely. Differences between individual tests must be considered, as clinical utility observed with one test might not apply to other tests. Overall, effectiveness was inconsistent among the six multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests we identified. Multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests may result in little or no difference in improvement in depression scores compared with treatment as usual, but some tests may improve response to treatment or remission from depression. The impact on adverse events is uncertain. The evidence, however, is uncertain, and therefore our confidence that these observed effects reflect the true effects is low to very low.For the management of major depression in people who had inadequate response to at least one medication, some multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests that include decision support tools are associated with additional costs and QALYs over the 1-year time horizon, and maybe be cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay amount of $100,000 per QALY. Publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing in Ontario would result in additional annual costs of between $3.5 million and $16.8 million, with a total budget impact of about $52 million over the next 5 years.People with major depression and caregivers generally supported multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing because they believed it could provide guidance that fit their values. They hoped such guidance would speed symptom relief, would reduce side and help inform their medication choices. Some patients expressed concerns over maintaining confidentiality of test results and the possibility that physicians would sacrifice patient-centred care to follow pharmacogenomic guidance.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Depression; Depressive Disorder, Major; Humans; Pharmacogenetics; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Quality of Life; Quality-Adjusted Life Years; Technology Assessment, Biomedical
PubMed: 34484487
DOI: No ID Found -
Gastroenterology Nov 2021Helicobacter pylori infects approximately 50% of individuals worldwide. Successful H pylori eradication is associated with reduced risk of gastric cancer and peptic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Helicobacter pylori infects approximately 50% of individuals worldwide. Successful H pylori eradication is associated with reduced risk of gastric cancer and peptic ulcer disease, among other conditions. We hypothesized that host genetic determinants, especially those affecting gastric pH, might contribute to eradication therapy failure, particularly when treatment adherence and antibiotic susceptibility are confirmed. We aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of host genetic variants associated with H pylori eradication failure.
METHODS
We searched the literature for studies comparing posttreatment H pylori eradication failure vs success (outcome) according to host genetic polymorphisms (exposure). Reference groups were defined according to genotypes (or corresponding phenotypes) hypothesized to be associated with successful eradication. We pooled estimates using a random-effects model and performed comprehensive sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS
We analyzed 57 studies from 11 countries; the vast majority analyzed CYP2C19 polymorphisms. Among individuals prescribed eradication regimens with proton pump inhibitors predominantly CYP2C19 metabolized, enhanced vs poor metabolizer phenotypes were associated with a 2.52-fold significantly higher likelihood of eradication failure and 4.44-fold significantly higher likelihood when treatment adherence and H pylori clarithromycin susceptibility (if relevant) were confirmed. There was no association between CYP2C19 variants and eradication failure if proton pump inhibitors less metabolized by or that bypass CYP2C19 metabolism were used. IL1B polymorphisms that are vs are not associated with less gastric acid suppression were associated with 1.72-fold significantly higher likelihood of eradication failure. There was no association between MDR1 polymorphisms and H pylori eradication failure. The certainty of evidence was moderate.
CONCLUSION
Based on meta-analysis, we identified host genetic polymorphisms significantly associated with H pylori eradication failure; host genetics might underlie eradication failure among treatment-adherent individuals with confirmed H pylori antibiotic susceptibility.
Topics: ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Female; Helicobacter Infections; Helicobacter pylori; Humans; Interleukin-1beta; Male; Middle Aged; Pharmacogenetics; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Pharmacogenomic Variants; Polymorphism, Single Nucleotide; Predictive Value of Tests; Proton Pump Inhibitors; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors; Treatment Failure; Young Adult
PubMed: 34358488
DOI: 10.1053/j.gastro.2021.07.043 -
Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics Oct 2019The HIV type-1 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, efavirenz, is widely used to treat HIV type-1 infection. Efavirenz is predominantly metabolized into...
The HIV type-1 nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, efavirenz, is widely used to treat HIV type-1 infection. Efavirenz is predominantly metabolized into inactive metabolites by cytochrome P450 (CYP)2B6, and patients with certain CYP2B6 genetic variants may be at increased risk for adverse effects, particularly central nervous system toxicity and treatment discontinuation. We summarize the evidence from the literature and provide therapeutic recommendations for efavirenz prescribing based on CYP2B6 genotypes.
Topics: Alkynes; Anti-HIV Agents; Benzoxazines; Cyclopropanes; Cytochrome P-450 CYP2B6; HIV Infections; HIV-1; Humans; Pharmacogenetics; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Practice Guidelines as Topic
PubMed: 31006110
DOI: 10.1002/cpt.1477 -
Medicine Aug 2019Over the past 10 years, epilepsy genetics has made dramatic progress. This study aimed to analyze the knowledge structure and the advancement of epilepsy genetics over... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
Over the past 10 years, epilepsy genetics has made dramatic progress. This study aimed to analyze the knowledge structure and the advancement of epilepsy genetics over the past decade based on co-word analysis of medical subject headings (MeSH) terms.
METHODS
Scientific publications focusing on epilepsy genetics from the PubMed database (January 2009-December 2018) were retrieved. Bibliometric information was analyzed quantitatively using Bibliographic Item Co-Occurrence Matrix Builder (BICOMB) software. A knowledge social network analysis and publication trend based on the high-frequency MeSH terms was built using VOSviewer.
RESULTS
According to the search strategy, a total of 5185 papers were included. Among all the extracted MeSH terms, 86 high-frequency MeSH terms were identified. Hot spots were clustered into 5 categories including: "ion channel diseases," "beyond ion channel diseases," "experimental research & epigenetics," "single nucleotide polymorphism & pharmacogenetics," and "genetic techniques". "Epilepsy," "mutation," and "seizures," were located at the center of the knowledge network. "Ion channel diseases" are typically in the most prominent position of epilepsy genetics research. "Beyond ion channel diseases" and "genetic techniques," however, have gradually grown into research cores and trends, such as "intellectual disability," "infantile spasms," "phenotype," "exome," " deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) copy number variations," and "application of next-generation sequencing." While ion channel genes such as "SCN1A," "KCNQ2," "SCN2A," "SCN8A" accounted for nearly half of epilepsy genes in MeSH terms, a number of additional beyond ion channel genes like "CDKL5," "STXBP1," "PCDH19," "PRRT2," "LGI1," "ALDH7A1," "MECP2," "EPM2A," "ARX," "SLC2A1," and more were becoming increasingly popular. In contrast, gene therapies, treatment outcome, and genotype-phenotype correlations were still in their early stages of research.
CONCLUSION
This co-word analysis provides an overview of epilepsy genetics research over the past decade. The 5 research categories display publication hot spots and trends in epilepsy genetics research which could consequently supply some direction for geneticists and epileptologists when launching new projects.
Topics: Bibliometrics; Epigenomics; Epilepsy; Humans; Ion Channels; Medical Subject Headings; Mutation; Pharmacogenomic Testing; Phenotype; Seizures
PubMed: 31393404
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000016782