Browsing by Author "Van Driest, Sara L."
Now showing 1 - 10 of 14
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Best-worst scaling methodology to evaluate constructs of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research: application to the implementation of pharmacogenetic testing for antidepressant therapy.(BMC, 2022-05-14) Salloum, Ramzi G.; Bishop, Jeffrey R.; Elchynski, Amanda L.; Smith, D. Max; Rowe, Elizabeth; Blake, Kathryn V.; Limdi, Nita A.; Aquilante, Christina L.; Bates, Jill; Beitelshees, Amber L.; Cipriani, Amber; Duong, Benjamin Q.; Empey, Philip E.; Formea, Christine M.; Hicks, J. Kevin; Mroz, Pawel; Oslin, David; Pasternak, Amy L.; Petry, Natasha; Ramsey, Laura B.; Schlichte, Allyson; Swain, Sandra M.; Ward, Kristen M.; Wiisanen, Kristin; Skaar, Todd C.; Van Driest, Sara L.; Cavallari, Larisa H.; Tuteja, SonyBACKGROUND: Despite the increased demand for pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing to guide antidepressant use, little is known about how to implement testing in clinical practice. Best-worst scaling (BWS) is a stated preferences technique for determining the relative importance of alternative scenarios and is increasingly being used as a healthcare assessment tool, with potential applications in implementation research. We conducted a BWS experiment to evaluate the relative importance of implementation factors for PGx testing to guide antidepressant use. METHODS: We surveyed 17 healthcare organizations that either had implemented or were in the process of implementing PGx testing for antidepressants. The survey included a BWS experiment to evaluate the relative importance of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs from the perspective of implementing sites. RESULTS: Participating sites varied on their PGx testing platform and methods for returning recommendations to providers and patients, but they were consistent in ranking several CFIR constructs as most important for implementation: patient needs/resources, leadership engagement, intervention knowledge/beliefs, evidence strength and quality, and identification of champions. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the feasibility of using choice experiments to systematically evaluate the relative importance of implementation determinants from the perspective of implementing organizations. BWS findings can inform other organizations interested in implementing PGx testing for mental health. Further, this study demonstrates the application of BWS to PGx, the findings of which may be used by other organizations to inform implementation of PGx testing for mental health disorders.Item Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2C19 and Proton Pump Inhibitor Dosing(Wiley, 2021) Lima, John J.; Thomas, Cameron D.; Barbarino, Julia; Desta, Zeruesenay; Van Driest, Sara L.; El Rouby, Nihal; Johnson, Julie A.; Cavallari, Larisa H.; Shakhnovich, Valentina; Thacker, David L.; Scott, Stuart A.; Schwab, Matthias; Uppugunduri, Chakradhara Rao S.; Formea, Christine M.; Franciosi, James P.; Sangkuhl, Katrin; Gaedigk, Andrea; Klein, Teri E.; Gammal, Roseann S.; Furuta, Takahisa; Medicine, School of MedicineProton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are widely used for acid suppression in the treatment and prevention of many conditions, including gastroesophageal reflux disease, gastric and duodenal ulcers, erosive esophagitis, Helicobacter pylori infection, and pathological hypersecretory conditions. Most PPIs are metabolized primarily by cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) into inactive metabolites, and CYP2C19 genotype has been linked to PPI exposure, efficacy, and adverse effects. We summarize the evidence from the literature and provide therapeutic recommendations for PPI prescribing based on CYP2C19 genotype (updates at www.cpicpgx.org). The potential benefits of using CYP2C19 genotype data to guide PPI therapy include (i) identifying patients with genotypes predictive of lower plasma exposure and prescribing them a higher dose that will increase the likelihood of efficacy, and (ii) identifying patients on chronic therapy with genotypes predictive of higher plasma exposure and prescribing them a decreased dose to minimize the risk of toxicity that is associated with long-term PPI use, particularly at higher plasma concentrations.Item Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium Guideline for CYP2D6, OPRM1, and COMT Genotypes and Select Opioid Therapy(Wiley, 2021) Crews, Kristine R.; Monte, Andrew A.; Huddart, Rachel; Caudle, Kelly E.; Kharasch, Evan D.; Gaedigk, Andrea; Dunnenberger, Henry M.; Leeder, J. Steven; Callaghan, John T.; Samer, Caroline Flora; Klein, Teri E.; Haidar, Cyrine E.; Van Driest, Sara L.; Ruano, Gualberto; Sangkuhl, Katrin; Cavallari, Larisa H.; Müller, Daniel J.; Prows, Cynthia A.; Nagy, Mohamed; Somogyi, Andrew A.; Skaar, Todd C.; Medicine, School of MedicineOpioids are mainly used to treat both acute and chronic pain. Several opioids are metabolized to some extent by CYP2D6 (codeine, tramadol, hydrocodone, oxycodone and methadone). Polymorphisms in CYP2D6 have been studied for an association with the clinical effect and safety of these drugs. Other genes which have been studied for their association with opioid clinical effect or adverse events include OPRM1 (mu receptor) and COMT (catechol-O-methyltransferase). This guideline updates and expands the 2014 Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for CYP2D6 genotype and codeine therapy and includes a summation of the evidence describing the impact of CYP2D6, OPRM1 and COMT on opioid analgesia and adverse events. We provide therapeutic recommendations for the use of CYP2D6 genotype results for prescribing codeine and tramadol and describe the limited and/or weak data for CYP2D6 and hydrocodone, oxycodone and methadone and for OPRM1 and COMT for clinical use.Item Effect of SLCO1B1 Polymorphisms on High‐Dose Methotrexate Clearance in Children and Young Adults With Leukemia and Lymphoblastic Lymphoma(Wiley, 2021) Schulte, Rachael R.; Choi, Leena; Utreja, Nipun; Van Driest, Sara L.; Stein, C. Michael; Ho, Richard H.; Pediatrics, School of MedicineHigh-dose (HD) methotrexate (MTX) is a critical component of treatment for hematologic malignancies in children and young adults. Therapeutic drug monitoring is necessary due to substantial interindividual variation in MTX clearance. Common function-altering polymorphisms in SLCO1B1 (encodes OATP1B1, which transports MTX) may contribute to clearance variability. We performed pharmacokinetic modeling using data for 106 children and young adults treated with HD MTX for hematologic malignancies; of 396 total courses of HD MTX, 360 consisted of 5 g/m2 over 24 hours. We evaluated the contribution of clinical covariates and SLCO1B1 genotype (388A>G and 521T>C) to MTX clearance variability. Of the clinical covariates studied, patient weight improved the pharmacokinetic model most significantly (P < 0.001). The addition of the SLCO1B1 variants individually further improved the model (P < 0.05 for each). An interaction between these variants was suggested when both were included (P = 0.017). SLCO1B1 genotype should be considered in efforts to personalize HD MTX dosing.Item Establishing the value of genomics in medicine: the IGNITE Pragmatic Trials Network.(Springer, 2021-07) Ginsburg, Geoffrey S.; Cavallari, Larisa H.; Chakraborty, Hrishikesh; Cooper-DeHoff, Rhonda M.; Dexter, Paul R.; Eadon, Michael T.; Ferket, Bart S.; Horowitz, Carol R.; Johnson, Julie A.; Kannry, Joseph; Kucher, Natalie; Madden, Ebony B.; Orlando, Lori A.; Parker, Wanda; Peterson, Josh; Pratt, Victoria M.; Rakhra-Burris, Tejinder K.; Ramos, Michelle A.; Skaar, Todd C.; Sperber, Nina; Steen-Burrell, Kady-Ann; Van Driest, Sara L.; Voora, Deepak; Wiisanen, Kristin; Winterstein, Almut G.; Volpi, SimonaPURPOSE: A critical gap in the adoption of genomic medicine into medical practice is the need for the rigorous evaluation of the utility of genomic medicine interventions. METHODS: The Implementing Genomics in Practice Pragmatic Trials Network (IGNITE PTN) was formed in 2018 to measure the clinical utility and cost-effectiveness of genomic medicine interventions, to assess approaches for real-world application of genomic medicine in diverse clinical settings, and to produce generalizable knowledge on clinical trials using genomic interventions. Five clinical sites and a coordinating center evaluated trial proposals and developed working groups to enable their implementation. RESULTS: Two pragmatic clinical trials (PCTs) have been initiated, one evaluating genetic risk APOL1 variants in African Americans in the management of their hypertension, and the other to evaluate the use of pharmacogenetic testing for medications to manage acute and chronic pain as well as depression. CONCLUSION: IGNITE PTN is a network that carries out PCTs in genomic medicine; it is focused on diversity and inclusion of underrepresented minority trial participants; it uses electronic health records and clinical decision support to deliver the interventions. IGNITE PTN will develop the evidence to support (or oppose) the adoption of genomic medicine interventions by patients, providers, and payers.Item Implementing a pragmatic clinical trial to tailor opioids for acute pain on behalf of the IGNITE ADOPT PGx investigators.(Wiley, 2022-07-28) Cavallari, Larisa H.; Cicali, Emily; Wiisanen, Kristin; Fillingim, Roger B.; Chakraborty, Hrishikesh; Myers, Rachel A.; Blake, Kathryn V.; Asiyanbola, Bolanle; Baye, Jordan F.; Bronson, Wesley H.; Cook, Kelsey J.; Elwood, Erica N.; Gray, Chancellor F.; Gong, Yan; Hines, Lindsay; Kannry, Joseph; Kucher, Natalie; Lynch, Sheryl; Nguyen, Khoa A.; Obeng, Aniwaa Owusu; Pratt, Victoria M.; Prieto, Hernan A.; Ramos, Michelle; Sadeghpour, Azita; Singh, Rajbir; Rosenman, Marc; Starostik, Petr; Thomas, Cameron D.; Tillman, Emma; Dexter, Paul R.; Horowitz, Carol R.; Orlando, Lori A.; Peterson, Josh F.; Skaar, Todd C.; Van Driest, Sara L.; Volpi, Simona; Voora, Deepak; Parvataneni, Hari K.; Johnson, Julie A.Opioid prescribing for postoperative pain management is challenging because of inter-patient variability in opioid response and concern about opioid addiction. Tramadol, hydrocodone, and codeine depend on the cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) enzyme for formation of highly potent metabolites. Individuals with reduced or absent CYP2D6 activity (i.e., intermediate metabolizers [IMs] or poor metabolizers [PMs], respectively) have lower concentrations of potent opioid metabolites and potentially inadequate pain control. The primary objective of this prospective, multicenter, randomized pragmatic trial is to determine the effect of postoperative CYP2D6-guided opioid prescribing on pain control and opioid usage. Up to 2020 participants, age ≥8 years, scheduled to undergo a surgical procedure will be enrolled and randomized to immediate pharmacogenetic testing with clinical decision support (CDS) for CYP2D6 phenotype-guided postoperative pain management (intervention arm) or delayed testing without CDS (control arm). CDS is provided through medical record alerts and/or a pharmacist consult note. For IMs and PM in the intervention arm, CDS includes recommendations to avoid hydrocodone, tramadol, and codeine. Patient-reported pain-related outcomes are collected 10 days and 1, 3, and 6 months after surgery. The primary outcome, a composite of pain intensity and opioid usage at 10 days postsurgery, will be compared in the subgroup of IMs and PMs in the intervention (n = 152) versus the control (n = 152) arm. Secondary end points include prescription pain medication misuse scores and opioid persistence at 6 months. This trial will provide data on the clinical utility of CYP2D6 phenotype-guided opioid selection for improving postoperative pain control and reducing opioid-related risks.Item Medication history-wide association studies for pharmacovigilance of pregnant patients(Springer Nature, 2022-09-16) Challa, Anup P.; Niu, Xinnan; Garrison, Etoi A.; Van Driest, Sara L.; Bastarache, Lisa M.; Lippmann, Ethan S.; Lavieri, Robert R.; Goldstein, Jeffery A.; Aronoff, David M.; Medicine, School of MedicineBackground: Systematic exclusion of pregnant people from interventional clinical trials has created a public health emergency for millions of patients through a dearth of robust safety data for common drugs. Methods: We harnessed an enterprise collection of 2.8 M electronic health records (EHRs) from routine care, leveraging data linkages between mothers and their babies to detect drug safety signals in this population at full scale. Our mixed-methods signal detection approach stimulates new hypotheses for post-marketing surveillance agnostically of both drugs and diseases-by identifying 1,054 drugs historically prescribed to pregnant patients; developing a quantitative, medication history-wide association study; and integrating a qualitative evidence synthesis platform using expert clinician review for integration of biomedical specificity-to test the effects of maternal exposure to diverse drugs on the incidence of neurodevelopmental defects in their children. Results: We replicated known teratogenic risks and existing knowledge on drug structure-related teratogenicity; we also highlight 5 common drug classes for which we believe this work warrants updated assessment of their safety. Conclusion: Here, we present roots of an agile framework to guide enhanced medication regulations, as well as the ontological and analytical limitations that currently restrict the integration of real-world data into drug safety management during pregnancy. This research is not a replacement for inclusion of pregnant people in prospective clinical studies, but it presents a tractable team science approach to evaluating the utility of EHRs for new regulatory review programs-towards improving the delicate equipoise of accuracy and ethics in assessing drug safety in pregnancy.Item Multi-site investigation of strategies for the clinical implementation of CYP2D6 genotyping to guide drug prescribing(Springer Nature, 2019-10) Cavallari, Larisa H.; Van Driest, Sara L.; Prows, Cynthia A.; Bishop, Jeffrey R.; Limdi, Nita A.; Pratt, Victoria M.; Ramsey, Laura B.; Smith, D. Max; Tuteja, Sony; Duong, Benjamin Q.; Hicks, J. Kevin; Lee, James C.; Obeng, Aniwaa Owusu; Beitelshees, Amber L.; Bell, Gillian C.; Blake, Kathryn; Crona, Daniel J.; Dressler, Lynn; Gregg, Ryan A.; Hines, Lindsay J.; Scott, Stuart A.; Shelton, Richard C.; Weitzel, Kristin Wiisanen; Johnson, Julie A.; Peterson, Josh F.; Empey, Philip E.; Skaar, Todd C.; Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of MedicinePURPOSE: A number of institutions have clinically implemented CYP2D6 genotyping to guide drug prescribing. We compared implementation strategies of early adopters of CYP2D6 testing, barriers faced by both early adopters and institutions in the process of implementing CYP2D6 testing, and approaches taken to overcome these barriers. METHODS: We surveyed eight early adopters of CYP2D6 genotyping and eight institutions in the process of adoption. Data were collected on testing approaches, return of results procedures, applications of genotype results, challenges faced, and lessons learned. RESULTS: Among early adopters, CYP2D6 testing was most commonly ordered to assist with opioid and antidepressant prescribing. Key differences among programs included test ordering and genotyping approaches, result reporting, and clinical decision support. However, all sites tested for copy-number variation and nine common variants, and reported results in the medical record. Most sites provided automatic consultation and had designated personnel to assist with genotype-informed therapy recommendations. Primary challenges were related to stakeholder support, CYP2D6 gene complexity, phenotype assignment, and sustainability. CONCLUSION: There are specific challenges unique to CYP2D6 testing given the complexity of the gene and its relevance to multiple medications. Consensus lessons learned may guide those interested in pursuing similar clinical pharmacogenetic programs.Item Multisite evaluation of institutional processes and implementation determinants for pharmacogenetic testing to guide antidepressant therapy.(Wiley, 2022-02) Tuteja, Sony; Salloum, Ramzi G.; Elchynski, Amanda L.; Smith, D. Max; Rowe, Elizabeth; Blake, Kathryn V.; Limdi, Nita A.; Aquilante, Christina L.; Bates, Jill; Beitelshees, Amber L.; Cipriani, Amber; Duong, Benjamin Q.; Empey, Philip E.; Formea, Christine M.; Hicks, J. Kevin; Mroz, Pawel; Oslin, David; Pasternak, Amy L.; Petry, Natasha; Ramsey, Allyson; Swain, Sandra M.; Ward, Kristen M.; Wiisanen, Kristin; Skaar, Todd C.; Van Driest, Sara L.; Cavallari, Larisa H.; Bishop, Jeffrey R.There is growing interest in utilizing pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing to guide antidepressant use, but there is lack of clarity on how to implement testing into clinical practice. We administered two surveys at 17 sites that had implemented or were in the process of implementing PGx testing for antidepressants. Survey 1 collected data on the process and logistics of testing. Survey 2 asked sites to rank the importance of Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) constructs using best-worst scaling choice experiments. Of the 17 sites, 13 had implemented testing and four were in the planning stage. Thirteen offered testing in the outpatient setting, and nine in both outpatient/inpatient settings. PGx tests were mainly ordered by psychiatry (92%) and primary care (69%) providers. CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 were the most commonly tested genes. The justification for antidepressants selected for PGx guidance was based on Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines (94%) and US Food and Drug Administration (FDA; 75.6%) guidance. Both institutional (53%) and commercial laboratories (53%) were used for testing. Sites varied on the methods for returning results to providers and patients. Sites were consistent in ranking CFIR constructs and identified patient needs/resources, leadership engagement, intervention knowledge/beliefs, evidence strength and quality, and the identification of champions as most important for implementation. Sites deployed similar implementation strategies and measured similar outcomes. The process of implementing PGx testing to guide antidepressant therapy varied across sites, but key drivers for successful implementation were similar and may help guide other institutions interested in providing PGx-guided pharmacotherapy for antidepressant management.Item Multisite investigation of strategies for the clinical implementation of pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing(Elsevier, 2021) Duarte, Julio D.; Dalton, Rachel; Elchynski, Amanda L.; Smith, D. Max; Cicali, Emily J.; Lee, James C.; Duong, Benjamin Q.; Petry, Natasha J.; Aquilante, Christina L.; Beitelshees, Amber L.; Empey, Philip E.; Johnson, Julie A.; Obeng, Aniwaa Owusu; Pasternak, Amy L.; Pratt, Victoria M.; Ramsey, Laura B.; Tuteja, Sony; Van Driest, Sara L.; Wiisanen, Kristin; Hicks, J. Kevin; Cavallari, Larisa H.; IGNITE Network Pharmacogenetics Working Group; Medical and Molecular Genetics, School of MedicinePurpose: The increased availability of clinical pharmacogenetic (PGx) guidelines and decreasing costs for genetic testing have slowly led to increased utilization of PGx testing in clinical practice. Pre-emptive PGx testing, where testing is performed in advance of drug prescribing, is one means to ensure results are available at the time of prescribing decisions. However, the most efficient and effective methods to clinically implement this strategy remain unclear. Methods: In this report, we compare and contrast implementation strategies for pre-emptive PGx testing by 15 early-adopter institutions. We surveyed these groups, collecting data on testing approaches, team composition, and workflow dynamics, in addition to estimated third-party reimbursement rates. Results: We found that while pre-emptive PGx testing models varied across sites, institutions shared several commonalities, including methods to identify patients eligible for testing, involvement of a precision medicine clinical team in program leadership, and the implementation of pharmacogenes with Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines available. Finally, while reimbursement rate data were difficult to obtain, the data available suggested that reimbursement rates for pre-emptive PGx testing remain low. Conclusion: These findings should inform the establishment of future implementation efforts at institutions considering a pre-emptive PGx testing program.