Pilot Findings of Pharmacogenomics in Perioperative Care: Initial Results From the First Phase of the ImPreSS Trial

BACKGROUND

Pharmacogenomics, which offers a potential means by which to inform prescribing and avoid adverse drug reactions, has gained increasing consideration in other medical settings but has not been broadly evaluated during perioperative care.

METHODS

The Implementation of Pharmacogenomic Decision Support in Surgery (ImPreSS) Trial is a prospective, single-center study consisting of a prerandomization pilot and a subsequent randomized phase. We describe findings from the pilot period. Patients planning elective surgeries were genotyped with pharmacogenomic results, and decision support was made available to anesthesia providers in advance of surgery. Pharmacogenomic result access and prescribing records were analyzed. Surveys (Likert-scale) were administered to providers to understand utilization barriers.

RESULTS

Of eligible anesthesiology providers, 166 of 211 (79%) enrolled. A total of 71 patients underwent genotyping and surgery (median, 62 years; 55% female; average American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, 2.6; 58 inpatients and 13 ambulatories). No patients required postoperative intensive care or pain consultations. At least 1 provider accessed pharmacogenomic results before or during 41 of 71 surgeries (58%). Faculty were more likely to access results (78%) compared to house staff (41%; P = .003) and midlevel practitioners (15%) ( P < .0001). Notably, all administered intraoperative medications had favorable genomic results with the exception of succinylcholine administration to 1 patient with genomically increased risk for prolonged apnea (without adverse outcome). Considering composite prescribing in preoperative, recovery, throughout hospitalization, and at discharge, each patient was prescribed a median of 35 (range 15-83) total medications, 7 (range 1-22) of which had annotated pharmacogenomic results. Of 2371 prescribing events, 5 genomically high-risk medications were administered (all tramadol or omeprazole; with 2 of 5 pharmacogenomic results accessed), and 100 genomically cautionary mediations were administered (hydralazine, oxycodone, and pantoprazole; 61% rate of accessing results). Providers reported that although results were generally easy to access and understand, the most common reason for not considering results was because remembering to access pharmacogenomic information was not yet a part of their normal clinical workflow.

CONCLUSIONS

Our pilot data for result access rates suggest interest in pharmacogenomics by anesthesia providers, even if opportunities to alter prescribing in response to high-risk genotypes were infrequent. This pilot phase has also uncovered unique considerations for implementing pharmacogenomic information in the perioperative care setting, and new strategies including adding the involvement of surgery teams, targeting patients likely to need intensive care and dedicated pain care, and embedding pharmacists within rounding models will be incorporated in the follow-on randomized phase to increase engagement and likelihood of affecting prescribing decisions and clinical outcomes.

Modern developments in germline pharmacogenomics for oncology prescribing

The integration of genomic data into personalized treatment planning has revolutionized oncology care. Despite this, patients with cancer remain vulnerable to high rates of adverse drug events and medication inefficacy, affecting prognosis and quality of life. Pharmacogenomics is a field seeking to identify germline genetic variants that contribute to an individual's unique drug response. Although there is widespread integration of genomic information in oncology, somatic platforms, rather than germline biomarkers, have dominated the attention of cancer providers. Patients with cancer potentially stand to benefit from improved integration of both somatic and germline genomic information, especially because the latter may complement treatment planning by informing toxicity risk for drugs with treatment-limiting tolerabilities and narrow therapeutic indices. Although certain germline pharmacogenes, such as TPMT, UGT1A1, and DPYD, have been recognized for decades, recent attention has illuminated modern potential dosing implications for a whole new set of anticancer agents, including targeted therapies and antibody-drug conjugates, as well as the discovery of additional genetic variants and newly relevant pharmacogenes. Some of this information has risen to the level of directing clinical action, with US Food and Drug Administration label guidance and recommendations by international societies and governing bodies. This review is focused on key new pharmacogenomic evidence and oncology-specific dosing recommendations. Personalized oncology care through integrated pharmacogenomics represents a unique multidisciplinary collaboration between oncologists, laboratory science, bioinformatics, pharmacists, clinical pharmacologists, and genetic counselors, among others. The authors posit that expanded consideration of germline genetic information can further transform the safe and effective practice of oncology in 2022 and beyond.

Anesthesia providers as stakeholders to adoption of pharmacogenomic information in perioperative care

OBJECTIVES

Integration of pharmacogenomics into clinical care is being studied in multiple disciplines. We hypothesized that understanding attitudes and perceptions of anesthesiologists, critical care and pain medicine providers would uncover unique considerations for future implementation within perioperative care.

METHODS

A survey (multiple choice and Likert-scale) was administered to providers within our Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care prior to initiation of a department-wide prospective pharmacogenomics implementation program. The survey addressed knowledge, perceptions, experiences, resources and barriers.

RESULTS

Of 153 providers contacted, 149 (97%) completed the survey. Almost all providers (92%) said that genetic results influence drug therapy, and few (22%) were skeptical about the usefulness of pharmacogenomics. Despite this enthusiasm, 87% said their awareness about pharmacogenomic information is lacking. Feeling well-informed about pharmacogenomics was directly related to years in practice/experience: only 38% of trainees reported being well-informed, compared to 46% of those with 1-10 years of experience, and nearly two-thirds with 11+ years (P < 0.05). Regarding barriers, providers reported uncertainty about availability of testing, turnaround time and whether testing is worth financial costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Anesthesiology, critical care and pain medicine providers are optimistic about the potential clinical utility of pharmacogenomics, but are uncertain about practical aspects of testing and desire clear guidelines on the use of results. These findings may inform future institutional efforts toward greater integration of genomic results to improve medication-related outcomes.

Applicability of Pharmacogenomically Guided Medication Treatment during Hospitalization of At-Risk Minority Patients

Known disparities exist in the availability of pharmacogenomic information for minority populations, amplifying uncertainty around clinical utility for these groups. We conducted a multi-site inpatient pharmacogenomic implementation program among self-identified African-Americans (AA; n = 135) with numerous rehospitalizations (n = 341) from 2017 to 2020 (NIH-funded ACCOuNT project/clinicaltrials.gov#NCT03225820). We evaluated the point-of-care availability of patient pharmacogenomic results to healthcare providers via an electronic clinical decision support tool. Among newly added medications during hospitalizations and at discharge, we examined the most frequently utilized medications with associated pharmacogenomic results. The population was predominantly female (61%) with a mean age of 53 years (range 19-86). On average, six medications were newly prescribed during each individual hospital admission. For 48% of all hospitalizations, clinical pharmacogenomic information was applicable to at least one newly prescribed medication. Most results indicated genomic favorability, although nearly 29% of newly prescribed medications indicated increased genomic caution (increase in toxicity risk/suboptimal response). More than one of every five medications prescribed to AA patients at hospital discharge were associated with cautionary pharmacogenomic results (most commonly pantoprazole/suboptimal antacid effect). Notably, high-risk pharmacogenomic results (genomic contraindication) were exceedingly rare. We conclude that the applicability of pharmacogenomic information during hospitalizations for vulnerable populations at-risk for experiencing health disparities is substantial and warrants continued prospective investigation.

The Contribution of Pharmacogenetic Drug Interactions to 90-Day Hospital Readmissions: Preliminary Results from a Real-World Healthcare System

Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines exist for many medications commonly prescribed prior to hospital discharge, yet there are limited data regarding the contribution of gene-x-drug interactions to hospital readmissions. The present study evaluated the relationship between prescription of CPIC medications prescribed within 30 days of hospital admission and 90-day hospital readmission from 2010 to 2020 in a study population (N = 10,104) who underwent sequencing with a 14-gene pharmacogenetic panel. The presence of at least one pharmacogenetic indicator for a medication prescribed within 30 days of hospital admission was considered a gene-x-drug interaction. Multivariable logistic regression analyzed the association between one or more gene-x-drug interactions with 90-day readmission. There were 2211/2354 (93.9%) admitted patients who were prescribed at least one CPIC medication. Univariate analyses indicated that the presence of at least one identified gene-x-drug interaction increased the risk of 90-day readmission by more than 40% (OR = 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.09–1.84) (p = 0.01). A multivariable model adjusting for age, race, sex, employment status, body mass index, and medical conditions slightly attenuated the effect (OR = 1.32, 95% CI 1.02–1.73) (p = 0.04). Our results suggest that the presence of one or more CPIC gene-x-drug interactions increases the risk of 90-day hospital readmission, even after adjustment for demographic and clinical risk factors.

Creation of a pharmacogenomics patient portal complementary to an existing institutional provider-facing clinical decision support system

Background

Applied pharmacogenomics presents opportunities for improving patient care through precision medicine, particularly when paired with appropriate clinical decision support (CDS). However, a lack of patient resources for understanding pharmacogenomic test results may hinder shared decision-making and patient confidence in treatment. We sought to create a patient pharmacogenomics education and results delivery platform complementary to a CDS system to facilitate further research on the relevance of patient education to pharmacogenomics.

Methods

We conceptualized a model that extended the data access layer of an existing institutional CDS tool to allow for the pairing of decision supports offered to providers with patient-oriented summaries at the same level of phenotypic specificity. We built a two-part system consisting of a secure portal for patient use and an administrative dashboard for patient summary creation. The system was built in an ASP.NET and AngularJS architecture, and all data was housed in a HIPAA-compliant data center, with PHI secure in transit and at rest.

Results

The YourPGx Patient Portal was deployed on the institutional network in June 2019. Fifty-eight unique patient portal summaries have been written so far, which can provide over 4500 results modules to the pilot population of 544 patients. Patient behavior on the portal is being logged for further research.

Conclusions

To our knowledge, this is the first automated system designed and deployed to provide detailed, personalized patient pharmacogenomics education complementary to a clinical decision support system. Future work will expand upon this system to allow for telemedicine and patient notification of new or updated results.

Implementation of pharmacogenomic testing in oncology care (PhOCus): study protocol of a pragmatic, randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Many cancer patients who receive chemotherapy experience adverse drug effects. Pharmacogenomics (PGx) has promise to personalize chemotherapy drug dosing to maximize efficacy and safety. Fluoropyrimidines and irinotecan have well-known germline PGx associations. At our institution, we have delivered PGx clinical decision support (CDS) based on preemptively obtained genotyping results for a large number of non-oncology medications since 2012, but have not previously evaluated the utility of this strategy for patients initiating anti-cancer regimens. We hypothesize that providing oncologists with preemptive germline PGx information along with CDS will enable individualized dosing decisions and result in improved patient outcomes.

METHODS

Patients with oncologic malignancies for whom fluoropyrimidine and/or irinotecan-inclusive therapy is being planned will be enrolled and randomly assigned to PGx and control arms. Patients will be genotyped in a clinical laboratory across panels that include actionable variants in UGT1A1 and DPYD. For PGx arm patients, treating providers will be given access to the patient-specific PGx results with CDS prior to treatment initiation. In the control arm, genotyping will be deferred, and dosing will occur as per usual care. Co-primary endpoints are dose intensity deviation rate (the proportion of patients receiving dose modifications during the first treatment cycle), and grade ⩾3 treatment-related toxicities throughout the treatment course. Additional study endpoints will include cumulative drug dose intensity, progression-free survival, dosing of additional PGx supportive medications, and patient-reported quality of life and understanding of PGx.

DISCUSSION

Providing a platform of integrated germline PGx information may promote personalized chemotherapy dosing decisions and establish a new model of care to optimize oncology treatment planning.

Pharmacogenomic-Based Decision Support to Predict Adherence to Medications

Poor adherence is associated with worse disease outcomes. Pharmacogenomics provides a possible intervention to address adherence. We hypothesized that pharmacogenomic-informed care could increase adherence. Patients in a prospective case-control study underwent preemptive pharmacogenomic genotyping with results available for provider use at the point of care; controls (not genotyped) were treated by the same providers. Over 6,000 e-prescriptions for 39 medications with actionable pharmacogenomic information were analyzed. Composite adherence, measured by modified proportion of days covered (mPDC), was compared between cases/controls and genomically concordant vs. genomically higher-risk medications. Overall, 536 patients were included. No difference in mean mPDC was observed due to availability of pharmacogenomic guidance. However, case patients prescribed high-risk pharmacogenomic medications were more than twice as likely to have low mPDC for these medications compared with genomically concordant prescriptions (odds ratio = 2.4 (1.03-5.74), P < 0.05). This study is the first to show that composite pharmacogenomic information predicts adherence.

Pharmacogenomic considerations for medications in the perioperative setting

Several high-profile examples of adverse outcomes from medications used in the perioperative setting are well known (e.g., malignant hyperthermia, prolonged apnea, respiratory depression, inadequate analgesia), leading to an increased understanding of genetic susceptibilities underlying these risks. Pharmacogenomic information is increasingly being utilized in certain areas of medicine. Despite this, routine preoperative genetic screening to inform medication risk is not yet standard practice. In this review, we assess the current readiness of pharmacogenomic information for clinical consideration for several common perioperative medications, including description of key pharmacogenes, pharmacokinetic implications and potential clinical outcomes. The goal is to highlight medications for which emerging or considerable pharmacogenomic information exists and identify areas for future potential research.

Pharmacogenomics-Based Point-of-Care Clinical Decision Support Significantly Alters Drug Prescribing

Changes in behavior are necessary to apply genomic discoveries to practice. We prospectively studied medication changes made by providers representing eight different medicine specialty clinics whose patients had submitted to preemptive pharmacogenomic genotyping. An institutional clinical decision support (CDS) system provided pharmacogenomic results using traffic light alerts: green = genomically favorable, yellow = genomic caution, red = high risk. The influence of pharmacogenomic alerts on prescribing behaviors was the primary endpoint. In all, 2,279 outpatient encounters were analyzed. Independent of other potential prescribing mediators, medications with high pharmacogenomic risk were changed significantly more often than prescription drugs lacking pharmacogenomic information (odds ratio (OR) = 26.2 (9.0-75.3), P < 0.0001). Medications with cautionary pharmacogenomic information were also changed more frequently (OR = 2.4 (1.7-3.5), P < 0.0001). No pharmacogenomically high-risk medications were prescribed during the entire study when physicians consulted the CDS tool. Pharmacogenomic information improved prescribing in patterns aimed at reducing patient risk, demonstrating that enhanced prescription decision-making is achievable through clinical integration of genomic medicine.

The Pharmacogenomics Research Network Translational Pharmacogenetics Program: Outcomes and Metrics of Pharmacogenetic Implementations Across Diverse Healthcare Systems

Numerous pharmacogenetic clinical guidelines and recommendations have been published, but barriers have hindered the clinical implementation of pharmacogenetics. The Translational Pharmacogenetics Program (TPP) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Pharmacogenomics Research Network was established in 2011 to catalog and contribute to the development of pharmacogenetic implementations at eight US healthcare systems, with the goal to disseminate real-world solutions for the barriers to clinical pharmacogenetic implementation. The TPP collected and normalized pharmacogenetic implementation metrics through June 2015, including gene-drug pairs implemented, interpretations of alleles and diplotypes, numbers of tests performed and actionable results, and workflow diagrams. TPP participant institutions developed diverse solutions to overcome many barriers, but the use of Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines provided some consistency among the institutions. The TPP also collected some pharmacogenetic implementation outcomes (scientific, educational, financial, and informatics), which may inform healthcare systems seeking to implement their own pharmacogenetic testing programs.

Saracatinib as a metastasis inhibitor in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: A University of Chicago Phase 2 Consortium and DOD/PCF Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium Study

BACKGROUND

Fyn is a kinase that is upregulated in a subset of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Saracatinib potently inhibits Fyn activation. We have noted a relationship between Fyn expression and directional motility, a cellular process related to metastasis. As such we hypothesized that treatment with saracatinib would increase the time required to develop new metastatic lesions.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer that had progressed after docetaxel were eligible for enrollment. This study was executed as a randomized discontinuation trial. During a lead-in phase of two 28-Day cycles, all patients received saracatinib. Afterward, patients with radiographically stable disease were randomized to either saracatinib or placebo. Patients continued treatment until evidence of new metastasis.

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were treated. Only 26% of patients had stable disease after 8 weeks and thus proceeded to randomization. This required early termination of the study for futility. The 70% of patients who progressed after the lead-in phase exhibited expansion of existing lesions or decompensation due to clinical progression without new metastatic lesions. Fatigue was reported in more than 25% of patients (all grades) with only two patients experiencing grade 3 toxicity. Other grade 3 adverse events included dehydration, thrombocytopenia, and weakness.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was unable to determine if saracatinib had potential as metastasis inhibitor. Metastasis inhibition by saracatinib may still be viable in an earlier time in the disease history.

Time from prior chemotherapy enhances prognostic risk grouping in the second-line setting of advanced urothelial carcinoma: a retrospective analysis of pooled, prospective phase 2 trials

BACKGROUND

Outcomes for patients in the second-line setting of advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC) are dismal. The recognized prognostic factors in this context are Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) >0, hemoglobin level (Hb) <10 g/dl, and liver metastasis (LM).

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this retrospective study of prospective trials was to investigate the prognostic value of time from prior chemotherapy (TFPC) independent of known prognostic factors.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Data from patients from seven prospective trials with available baseline TFPC, Hb, PS, and LM values were used for retrospective analysis (n=570). External validation was conducted in a second-line phase 3 trial comparing best supportive care (BSC) versus vinflunine plus BSC (n=352).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

Cox proportional hazards regression was used to evaluate the association of factors, with overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) being the respective primary and secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

ECOG-PS >0, LM, Hb <10 g/dl, and shorter TFPC were significant prognostic factors for OS and PFS on multivariable analysis. Patients with zero, one, two, and three to four factors demonstrated median OS of 12.2, 6.7, 5.1, and 3.0 mo, respectively (concordance statistic=0.638). Setting of prior chemotherapy (metastatic disease vs perioperative) and prior platinum agent (cisplatin or carboplatin) were not prognostic factors. External validation demonstrated a significant association of TFPC with PFS on univariable and most multivariable analyses, and with OS on univariable analyses. Limitations of retrospective analyses are applicable.

CONCLUSIONS

Shorter TFPC enhances prognostic classification independent of ECOG-PS >0, Hb <10 g/dl, and LM in the setting of second-line therapy for advanced UC. These data may facilitate drug development and interpretation of trials.

A randomized, phase II study of pazopanib in castrate-sensitive prostate cancer: a University of Chicago Phase II Consortium/Department of Defense Prostate Cancer Clinical Trials Consortium study

BACKGROUND

Intermittent androgen suppression (IAS) is an increasingly popular treatment option for castrate-sensitive prostate cancer. On the basis of previous data with anti-angiogenic strategies, we hypothesized that pan-inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor using pazopanib during the IAS off period would result in prolonged time to PSA failure.

METHODS

Men with biochemically recurrent prostate cancer, whose PSA was <0.5 ng ml(-1) after 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy were randomized to pazopanib 800 mg daily or observation. The planned primary outcome was time to PSA progression >4.0 ng ml(-1).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were randomized. Of 18 patients randomized to pazopanib, at the time of study closure, 4 had progressive disease, 1 remained on treatment and 13 (72%) electively disenrolled, the most common reason being patient request due to grade 1/2 toxicity (8 patients). Two additional patients were removed from treatment due to adverse events. Of 19 patients randomized to observation, at the time of study closure, 4 had progressive disease, 7 remained under protocol-defined observation and 8 (42%) had disenrolled, most commonly due to non-compliance with protocol visits (3 patients). Because of high dropout rates in both arms, the study was halted.

CONCLUSIONS

IAS is a treatment approach that may facilitate investigation of novel agents in the hormone-sensitive state. This trial attempted to investigate the role of antiangiogenic therapy in this setting, but encountered several barriers, including toxicities and patient non-compliance, which can make implementation of such a study difficult. Future investigative efforts in this arena should carefully consider drug toxicity and employ a design that maximizes patient convenience to reduce the dropout rate.