Consideration of patient preferences and challenges in storage and access of pharmacogenetic test results

Precision medicine from a citizen perspective: a survey of public attitudes towards pharmacogenomics in Flanders

BACKGROUND

Personalized medicine is an emerging field, aiming to improve the safety and efficacy of pharmacotherapy. The field's implementation in clinical care is steadily increasing. Pharmacogenomics are one example of personalized approaches in the clinic and direct-to-consumer (DTC) pharmacogenomic tests have become publicly available. We aimed to assess public opinion on pharmacogenomic research and testing to foster integration within Belgian health care.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was created and disseminated online, focusing on the citizen perspective. Participants' willingness to engage in pharmacogenomic research was the primary outcome. In addition, their awareness, understanding, expectations and overall acceptance towards pharmacogenomic testing was investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 156 participants (54.5% aged between 18 and 30 years, 45.5% > 30 years; 73.1% females) completed the survey. Half ever experienced side effects (46.2%) and treatment failure (52.6%). Up to 45.5% (n = 71) were willing to participate in pharmacogenomics research, and the majority (78.8%) were convinced that pharmacogenomic tests could help doctors to prescribe them the right medications. Additionally, 76.3% (n = 118) supported a partial reimbursement of pharmacogenomics tests. A minority (5.1%, n = 8) of participants showed interest in DTC tests, and 15.4% (n = 24) expressed privacy concerns regarding pharmacogenomics testing. Participants preferred their healthcare professionals' to perform the test and access their data, but refused commercial providers.

CONCLUSION

Overall, participants showed a positive attitude towards precision medicine and pharmacogenomics research. Our findings may help guiding future pharmacogenomic implementation initiatives to optimize drug use by using pharmacogenomic information integrated within health care.

Patient insights on features of an effective pharmacogenomics patient portal

OBJECTIVES

We built a novel mock pharmacogenomics web portal to deliver pharmacogenomic information and results to patients. Utilizing a patient focus group, we then sought to understand patient insights on desired features of an effective pharmacogenomics patient portal.

METHODS

The mock YourPGx Portal delivered four sample pharmacogenomic results (omeprazole, simvastatin, clopidogrel, and codeine). Patients from our existing institutional, prospective pharmacogenomics implementation study were recruited to pilot the mock portal and then asked to participate in a focus group discussion led by two facilitators. All patients had been previously genotyped, but none had been directly provided access to their own genotyping results and none had previously used the YourPGx portal. The focus group discussion explored nine domains: (1) factors influencing drug response, (2) concerns about drug effects, (3) understanding of genomics and pharmacogenomics, (4) reasons to undergo pharmacogenomic testing, (5) sources of pharmacogenomic information for patient education, (6) attributes of pharmacogenomic sources of information, (7) considerations about privacy and personal pharmacogenomic information, (8) sharing of pharmacogenomic information, and (9) features of an effective patient portal.

RESULTS

The median age of patients (n = 10) was 65.5 years old (range 38-72), 70% female, 50% Caucasian/30% Black, and 60% held a bachelor/advanced degree. When asked about resources for seeking pharmacogenomic information, patients preferred consulting their providers first, followed by self-education, then using information provided by university research organizations. A theme emerged regarding attributes of these sources, namely a desire for understandability and trust. Patients said that the effectiveness of a pharmacogenomics patient portal is improved with use of symbolisms/graphics and clear and concise content. Effective use of colors, quantifying information, consistency, and use of layperson's language were additional important facets. Patients communicated the appeal of secured phone/app-enabled access and said that they would desire linking to their electronic medical records to allow sharing of information with different members of their healthcare team.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients named providers as their primary source of pharmacogenomic information, but a pharmacogenomics patient portal that is carefully constructed to incorporate desired features may be a favorable tool to effectively deliver pharmacogenomic information and results to patients.

Developing Pharmacogenomic Reports: Insights from Patients and Clinicians

Increasingly, for a variety of indications, patients have their genomes sequenced and actionable results returned. A subset of returned results is pharmacogenomic (PGx) variants involved in the metabolism or action of medications. Although the impact of these variants on health is well-documented, little research exists on how to communicate these findings to patients and clinicians. We conducted semistructured interviews with end users to understand how best to communicate PGx results. Overall, patients and clinicians had similar opinions regarding report content, delivery, and application. Unique concerns specific to each stakeholder group were also expressed. Patients wanted an easy-to-understand individualized report that clinicians utilized to guide their care. Clinicians wanted reports that were easy-to-use, actionable, and integrated into their workflow. Implementation of these reports in a clinical setting will allow for broader user feedback and iterative improvement.

A proposed approach to accelerate evidence generation for genomic-based technologies in the context of a learning health system

Genomic technologies should demonstrate analytical and clinical validity and clinical utility prior to wider adoption in clinical practice. However, the question of clinical utility remains unanswered for many genomic technologies. In this paper, we propose three building blocks for rapid generation of evidence on clinical utility of promising genomic technologies that underpin clinical and policy decisions. We define promising genomic tests as those that have proven analytical and clinical validity. First, risk-sharing agreements could be implemented between payers and manufacturers to enable temporary coverage that would help incorporate promising technologies into routine clinical care. Second, existing data networks, such as the Sentinel Initiative and the National Patient-Centered Clinical Research Network (PCORnet) could be leveraged, augmented with genomic information to track the use of genomic technologies and monitor clinical outcomes in millions of people. Third, endorsement and engagement from key stakeholders will be needed to establish this collaborative model for rapid evidence generation; all stakeholders will benefit from better information regarding the clinical utility of these technologies. This collaborative model can create a multipurpose and reusable national resource that generates knowledge from data gathered as part of routine care to drive evidence-based clinical practice and health system changes.

Assessment of patient perceptions of genomic testing to inform pharmacogenomic implementation

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacogenomics seeks to improve prescribing by reducing drug inefficacy/toxicity. However, views of patients during pharmacogenomic-guided care are largely unknown. We sought to understand the attitudes and perceptions of patients in an institutional implementation project and hypothesized that views would differ on the basis of experience with pharmacogenomic-guided care.

METHODS

Two focus groups were conducted - one group included patients who had previously been subjected to broad pharmacogenomic genotyping with results available to physicians (pharmacogenomic group), whereas the other had not been offered genotyping (traditional care). Five domains were explored: (i) experiences with medications/side effects, (ii) understanding of pharmacogenomics, (iii) impact of pharmacogenomics on relationships with healthcare professionals, (iv) scenarios involving pharmacogenomic-guided prescribing, and (v) responses to pharmacogenomic education materials.

RESULTS

Nine pharmacogenomic and 13 traditional care participants were included. Participants in both groups agreed that pharmacogenomics could inform prescribing and help identify problem prescriptions, but expressed concerns over insurance coverage and employment discrimination. Both groups diverged on who should be permitted to access pharmacogenomic results, with some preferring access only for providers with a longstanding relationship, whereas others argued for open access. Notably, traditional care participants showed greater skepticism about how results might be used. Case scenarios and tested educational materials elicited strong desires on the part of patients for physicians to engage participants when considering pharmacogenomic-based prescribing and to utilize shared decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Participants experiencing pharmacogenomic-guided care were more receptive toward pharmacogenomic information being used than traditional care participants. As key stakeholders in implementation, addressing patients' concerns will be important to successfully facilitate clinical dissemination.

Practical application of opt-out recruitment methods in two health services research studies

BACKGROUND

Participant recruitment is an ongoing challenge in health research. Recruitment may be especially difficult for studies of access to health care because, even among those who are in care, people using services least often also may be hardest to contact and recruit. Opt-out recruitment methods (in which potential participants are given the opportunity to decline further contact about the study (opt out) following an initial mailing, and are then contacted directly if they have not opted out within a specified period) can be used for such studies. However, there is a dearth of literature on the effort needed for effective opt-out recruitment.

METHODS

In this paper we describe opt-out recruitment procedures for two studies on access to health care within the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs. We report resource requirements for recruitment efforts (number of opt-out packets mailed and number of phone calls made). We also compare the characteristics of study participants to potential participants via t-tests, Fisher's exact tests, and chi-squared tests.

RESULTS

Recruitment rates for our two studies were 12 and 21%, respectively. Across multiple study sites, we had to send between 4.3 and 9.2 opt-out packets to recruit one participant. The number of phone calls required to arrive at a final status for each potentially eligible Veteran (i.e. study participation or the termination of recruitment efforts) were 2.9 and 6.1 in the two studies, respectively. Study participants differed as expected from the population of potentially eligible Veterans based on planned oversampling of certain subpopulations. The final samples of participants did not differ statistically from those who were mailed opt-out packets, with one exception: in one of our two studies, participants had higher rates of mental health service use in the past year than did those mailed opt-out packets (64 vs. 47%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results emphasize the practicality of using opt-out methods for studies of access to health care. Despite the benefits of these methods, opt-out alone may be insufficient to eliminate non-response bias on key variables. Researchers will need to balance considerations of sample representativeness and feasibility when designing studies investigating access to care.

Examining perceptions of the usefulness and usability of a mobile-based system for pharmacogenomics clinical decision support: a mixed methods study

Background. Pharmacogenomic testing has the potential to improve the safety and efficacy of pharmacotherapy, but clinical application of pharmacogenetic knowledge has remained uncommon. Clinical Decision Support (CDS) systems could help overcome some of the barriers to clinical implementation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the perception and usability of a web- and mobile-enabled CDS system for pharmacogenetics-guided drug therapy–the Medication Safety Code (MSC) system–among potential users (i.e., physicians and pharmacists). Furthermore, this study sought to collect data on the practicability and comprehensibility of potential layouts of a proposed personalized pocket card that is intended to not only contain the machine-readable data for use with the MSC system but also human-readable data on the patient’s pharmacogenomic profile. Methods. We deployed an emergent mixed methods design encompassing (1) qualitative interviews with pharmacists and pharmacy students, (2) a survey among pharmacogenomics experts that included both qualitative and quantitative elements and (3) a quantitative survey among physicians and pharmacists. The interviews followed a semi-structured guide including a hypothetical patient scenario that had to be solved by using the MSC system. The survey among pharmacogenomics experts focused on what information should be printed on the card and how this information should be arranged. Furthermore, the MSC system was evaluated based on two hypothetical patient scenarios and four follow-up questions on the perceived usability. The second survey assessed physicians’ and pharmacists’ attitude towards the MSC system. Results. In total, 101 physicians, pharmacists and PGx experts coming from various relevant fields evaluated the MSC system. Overall, the reaction to the MSC system was positive across all investigated parameters and among all user groups. The majority of participants were able to solve the patient scenarios based on the recommendations displayed on the MSC interface. A frequent request among participants was to provide specific listings of alternative drugs and concrete dosage instructions. Negligence of other patient-specific factors for choosing the right treatment such as renal function and co-medication was a common concern related to the MSC system, while data privacy and cost-benefit considerations emerged as the participants’ major concerns regarding pharmacogenetic testing in general. The results of the card layout evaluation indicate that a gene-centered and tabulated presentation of the patient’s pharmacogenomic profile is helpful and well-accepted. Conclusions. We found that the MSC system was well-received among the physicians and pharmacists included in this study. A personalized pocket card that lists a patient’s metabolizer status along with critically affected drugs can alert physicians and pharmacists to the availability of essential therapy modifications.

Implementation of personalized medicine services in community pharmacies: perceptions of independent community pharmacists

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the perceptions of independent community pharmacists within a regional independent community pharmacy cooperative on implementing personalized medicine services at their pharmacies and to gauge the pharmacists' self-reported knowledge of pharmacogenomic principles.

DESIGN

Descriptive, exploratory, nonexperimental study.

SETTING

American Pharmacy Services Corporation (APSC), 2011-12.

PARTICIPANTS

Pharmacists (n = 101) affiliated with the independent pharmacies of APSC.

INTERVENTION

Single-mode survey.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Independent community pharmacists' interest in implementing personalized medicine services, perceived readiness to provide such services, and perceived barriers to implementation.

RESULTS

101 completed surveys were returned for data analysis. The majority of pharmacists surveyed (75%) expressed interest in offering personalized medicine services. When asked to describe their knowledge of pharmacogenomics and readiness to implement such services, more than 50% said they were not knowledgeable on the subject and would not currently be comfortable making drug therapy recommendations to physicians or confident counseling patients based on results of genetic screenings without further training and education. Respondents identified cost of providing the service, reimbursement issues, current knowledge of pharmacogenomics, and time to devote to the program as the greatest barriers to implementing personalized medicine services.

CONCLUSION

The majority of independent community pharmacists are interested in incorporating personalized medicine services into their practices, but they require further education before this is possible. Future initiatives should focus on the development of comprehensive education programs to further train pharmacists for provision of these services.

Opinions, hopes and concerns regarding pharmacogenomics: a comparison of healthy individuals, heart failure patients and heart transplant recipients

It is not yet known whether healthy individuals and patients with a chronic disease have similar attitudes towards pharmacogenomics. Thus we conducted a survey of 175 healthy volunteers, 175 heart failure (HF) patients and 100 heart transplant recipients to compare their opinions on this subject. Most participants (>90%) stated that they would accept pharmacogenomic testing and expressed high hopes regarding its potential applications. Overall, interest for pharmacogenomics was shared equally among the three groups. In contrast, after adjusting for age, gender, education and income, healthy individuals were more likely to voice concerns about potential employment (P=0.008 vs HF, odds ratio (OR)=2.93, confidence interval (CI)=1.33-6.47; P=0.010 vs Transplant, OR=2.46, CI=1.24-4.90) and insurance discrimination (P=0.001 vs HF, OR=5.58, CI=2.01-15.48; P<0.001 vs Transplant, OR=4.98, CI=2.03-12.21) and were possibly more worried by confidentiality issues. These findings highlight the need for strict legislation and proper educational strategies directed at the general population to facilitate the clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics.

Delivering pharmacogenetic testing in a primary care setting

Pharmacogenetic testing refers to a type of genetic test to predict a patient’s likelihood to experience an adverse event or not respond to a given drug. Despite revision to several labels of commonly prescribed drugs regarding the impact of genetic variation, the use of this testing has been limited in many settings due to a number of factors. In the primary care setting, the limited office time as well as the limited knowledge and experience of primary care practitioners have likely attributed to the slow uptake of pharmacogenetic testing. This paper provides talking points for primary care physicians to discuss with patients when pharmacogenetic testing is warranted. As patients and physicians become more familiar and accepting of pharmacogenetic testing, it is anticipated that discussion time will be comparable to that of other clinical tests.

Clinical delivery of pharmacogenetic testing services: a proposed partnership between genetic counselors and pharmacists

One of the basic questions in the early uses of pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing revolves around the clinical delivery of testing. Because multiple health professionals may play a role in the delivery of PGx testing, various clinical delivery models have begun to be studied. We propose that a partnership between genetic counselors and pharmacists can assist clinicians in the delivery of comprehensive PGx services. Based on their expert knowledge of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, pharmacists can facilitate the appropriate application of PGx test results to adjust medication use as warranted and act as a liaison to the healthcare team recommending changes in medication based on test results and patient input. Genetic counselors are well-trained in genetics as well as risk communication and counseling methodology, but have limited knowledge of pharmaceuticals. The complementary knowledge and skill set supports the partnership between genetic counselors and pharmacists to provide effective PGx testing services.

Pharmacogenomics in children: advantages and challenges of next generation sequencing applications

Pharmacogenetics is considered as a prime example of how personalized medicine nowadays can be put into practice. However, genotyping to guide pharmacological treatment is relatively uncommon in the routine clinical practice. Several reasons can be found why the application of pharmacogenetics is less than initially anticipated, which include the contradictory results obtained for certain variants and the lack of guidelines for clinical implementation. However, more reproducible results are being generated, and efforts have been made to establish working groups focussing on evidence-based clinical guidelines. For another pharmacogenetic hurdle, the speed by which a pharmacogenetic profile for a certain drug can be obtained in an individual patient, there has been a revolution in molecular genetics through the introduction of next generation sequencing (NGS), making it possible to sequence a large number of genes up to the complete genome in a single reaction. Besides the enthusiasm due to the tremendous increase of our sequencing capacities, several considerations need to be made regarding quality and interpretation of the sequence data as well as ethical aspects of this technology. This paper will focus on the different NGS applications that may be useful for pharmacogenomics in children and the challenges that they bring on.