Download PDF
Fortschr Neurol Psychiatr
DOI: 10.1055/a-2060-0694
Originalarbeit

Barrieren bei der Implementierung pharmakogenetischer Testungen in der Psychiatrie in Deutschland – Ergebnisse aus der FACT-PGx Studie

Barriers for Implementation of PGx Testing in Psychiatric Hospitals in Germany: Results of the FACT-PGx Study
Martina Hahn 
1   Klinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
2   Klinik für psychische Gesundheit, varisano Klinikum Frankfurt Hoechst, Frankfurt, Germany
,
AmelieMerle Frantz
1   Klinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
,
Andreas Eckert
1   Klinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
,
Andreas Reif
1   Klinik für Psychiatrie, Psychosomatik und Psychotherapie, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Ziel der Studie Die FACT-PGx Studie sollte Barrieren bei der Implementierung von pharmakogenetischen Testungen auf Station einer psychiatrischen Klinik aufdecken, um sie in Folge überwinden zu können, so dass die flächendeckende Implementierung schneller erfolgen kann.

Methodik 104 Patienten (50% Frauen) mit F32.x oder F33.x wurden genotypisiert. 67 Patienten (64%; 57% Frauen) beantworteten den selbstentwickelten Fragebogen. Der Einfluss demografischer Daten wie Bildungsstand, Alter und Vorbehandlungen die Antworten des Fragebogens wurden mittels t-Test (kategorial) Wilcoxon-Rank-Test (kontinuierlich) untersucht.

Ergebnisse Kein Patient lehnte eine Genotypisierung ab. 99% glaubten, dass PGx ihren Aufenthalt verkürzen könne. Patienten >40 Jahre und mit höherem Bildungsgrad waren eher bereit, Geld für eine Genotypisierung auszugeben (beides p=0.009). Durchschnittlich waren die Patienten bereit, im Mittel 117,42 € +/- 140,49 € auszugeben und 15,83+/- 8,92 Tage auf Befunde zu warten. Die Prozessabläufe für eine Genotypisierung in der Klinik unterscheiden sich von dem Routinelabor.

Schlussfolgerung Patienten stellen bei der Implementierung keine Barriere dar, sondern befördern eher die Implementierung. Prozessabläufe können Barrieren darstellen, die jedoch durch Optimierung überwunden werden können.

Abstract

Objective The FACT-PGx study was conducted to analyze barriers to implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in psychiatric hospitals in Germany and to propose solutions for its faster and easier implementation in all hospitals.

Methods 104 patients (50% female) were genotyped and participated in the study. 67 completed a survey. To analyze the correlation between continuous data (age) of the survey, the wilcoxon rank test and for categorial data (education level, history of treatment and episodes), t-test was used.

Results No patient declined to be genotyped. 99% believed that genotyping could help to shorten their hospital stay. Patients >40 years of age and with higher educational levels were willing to pay for the PGx (p=0.009). On average, patients were willing to pay 117.42€ +/-140.49€ and to wait 15.83+/- 8.92 days for the results. Processes differed significantly between routine laboratory screening and PGx testing which could be a barrier for implementation.

Conclusion Patients are not barriers to but enablers of an implementation of PGx. New process flows can be barriers, but can be overcome by optimization.

Schlüsselwörter

Pharmakogenetik - Implementierung - Antidepressiva - Barrieren - PGx

Key words

PGx - implementation - barriers - antidepressants - pharmacogenetics

Zusätzliches Material



Publication History

Received: 28 October 2022

Accepted: 07 March 2023

Article published online:
02 May 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 D'Empaire I, Guico-Pabia CJ, Preskorn SH. Antidepressant treatment and altered CYP2D6 activity: are pharmacokinetic variations clinically relevant?. J Psychiatr Pract 2011; 17: 330-339 DOI: 10.1097/01.pra.0000405363.95881.01.. PMID: 21926528
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Howland RH. Sequenced Treatment Alternatives to Relieve Depression (STAR*D). Part 2: Study outcomes. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv 2008; 46: 21-24 DOI: 10.3928/02793695-20081001-05.. PMID: 18935932
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hiemke C, Bergemann N, Clement HW. et al. Consensus Guidelines for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Neuropsychopharmacology: Update 2017. Pharmacopsychiatry 2018; 51: 9-62 DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-116492.. Epub 2017 Sep 14. Erratum in: Pharmacopsychiatry 2018 Jan; 51(1-02): e1. PMID: 28910830
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Scherf-Clavel M, Weber H, Wurst C. et al. Effects of Pharmacokinetic Gene Variation on Therapeutic Drug Levels and Antidepressant Treatment Response. Pharmacopsychiatry. 2022. DOI: 10.1055/a-1872-0613. Epub ahead of print. PMID: 35839823
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Hicks JK, Bishop JR, Sangkuhl K. et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 Genotypes and Dosing of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2015; 98: 127-134 DOI: 10.1002/cpt.147.. Epub 2015 Jun 29. PMID: 25974703; PMCID: PMC4512908
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Hicks JK, Sangkuhl K, Swen JJ. et al. Clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guideline (CPIC) for CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 genotypes and dosing of tricyclic antidepressants: 2016 update. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2017; 102: 37-44 DOI: 10.1002/cpt.597.. Epub 2017 Feb 13. PMID: 27997040; PMCID: PMC5478479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Laika B, Leucht S, Heres S. et al. Intermediate metabolizer: increased side effects in psychoactive drug therapy. The key to cost-effectiveness of pretreatment CYP2D6 screening?. Pharmacogenomics J 2009; 9: 395-403 DOI: 10.1038/tpj.2009.23.. Epub 2009 May 19. PMID: 19451914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Carr DF, Pirmohamed M. Biomarkers of adverse drug reactions. Exp Biol Med 2018; 243: 291-299 DOI: 10.1177/1535370217733425.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bousman C, Arandjelovic K, Mabcuso SG. et al. Pharmacogenetic tesets and depressive symptom remission: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Pharmacogenomicy 2022; 20: 37-47
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Bättig V, Roll SC, Hahn M. Pharmacogenetic Testing in Depressed Patients and Interdisciplinary Exchange between a Pharmacist and Psychiatrists Results in Reduced Hospitalization Times. Pharmacopsychiatry 2020; 53: 185-192 DOI: 10.1055/a-1096-1171.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Tanner JA, Davies PE, Overall CC. et al. Cost-effectiveness of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing for depression from the Canadian public payer perspective. Pharmacogenomics 2020; 21: 521-531 DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2020-0012.. Epub 2020 Apr 17. PMID: 32301648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Pirmohamed M, James S, Meakin S. et al. Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients. BMJ 2004; 3: 15-19 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.329.7456.15.. PMID: 15231615; PMCID: PMC443443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Velligan DI, Sajatovic M, Hatch A. et al. Why do psychiatric patients stop antipsychotic medication? A systematic review of reasons for nonadherence to medication in patients with serious mental illness. Patient Prefer Adherence 2017; 11: 449-468 DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S124658.. PMID: 28424542; PMCID: PMC5344423
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Pérez V, Salavert A, Espadaler J. et al. Efficacy of prospective pharmacogenetic testing in the treatment of major depressive disorder: results of a randomized, double-blind clinical trial. BMC Psychiatry 2017; 17: 250 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-017-1412-1.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 www.pharmgkb.com „drug label annotations“. Accessed: 22.7.2022
    PubMed
  • 16 Hahn M, Müller DJ, Roll SC. Frequencies of Genetic Polymorphisms of Clinically Relevant Gene-Drug Pairs in a German Psychiatric Inpatient Population. Pharmacopsychiatry 2020; 53: 1-9
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Eckert A, Frantz AM, Reif A. et al. Akzeptanz, Wissen und Einstellungen von Ärzten zu pharmakogenetischen Tests. Nervenheilkunde. 2023 [Im Druck]
    PubMed
  • 18 McCarthy MJ, Chen Y, Demodena A. et al. Attitudes on pharmacogenetic testing in psychiatric patients with treatment-resistant depression. Depress Anxiety 2020; 37: 842-850 DOI: 10.1002/da.23074.. Epub 2020 Jul 15. PMID: 32667102; PMCID: PMC7484047
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Kastrinos A, Campbell-Salome G, Shelton S. et al. PGx in psychiatry: Patients’ knowledge, interest, and uncertainty management preferences in the context of pharmacogenomic testing. Patient education and counseling 2021; 104: 732-738 DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2020.12.0211002/da.23074.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Dunbar L, Butler R, Wheeler A. et al. Clinician experiences of employing the AmpliChip® CYP450 test in routine psychiatric practice. Journal of Psychopharmacology 2012; 26: 390-397 DOI: 10.1177/0269881109106957.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Laplace B, Calvet B, Lacroix A. et al. Acceptability of Pharmacogenetic Testing among French Psychiatrists,a National Survey. J Pers Med 2021; 11: 446 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11060446.. PMID: 34064030; PMCID: PMC8223981
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Liko I, Lai E, Griffin RJ. et al. Patients’ Perspectives on Psychiatric Pharmacogenetic Testing. Pharmacopsychiatry 2020; 53: 256-261 DOI: 10.1055/a-1183-5029.
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 McCarthy MJ, Chen Y, Demodena A. et al. Attitudes on pharmacogenetic testing in psychiatric patients with treatment-resistant depression. Depression and anxiety 2020; 37: 842-850 DOI: 10.1002/da.23074.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Frigon MP, Blackburn MÈ, Dubois-Bouchard C. et al. Pharmacogenetic testing in primary care practice: opinions of physicians, pharmacists and patients. Pharmacogenomics 2019; 20: 589-598 DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2019-0004.. PMID: 31190623
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 McLenon J, Rogers MAM. The fear of needles: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Adv Nurs 2019; 75: 30-42 DOI: 10.1111/jan.13818.. Epub 2018 Sep 11. PMID: 30109720
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Goodspeed A, Kostman N, Kriete TE. et al. Leveraging the utility of pharmacogenomics in psychiatry through clinical decision support: a focus group study. Ann Gen Psychiatry 2019; 18: 13 DOI: 10.1186/s12991-019-0237-3.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Shishko I, Almeida K, Silvia RJ. et al. Psychiatric pharmacists’ perception on the use of pharmacogenomic testing in the mental health population. Pharmacogenomics 2015; 16: 949-958 DOI: 10.2217/pgs.15.22.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Hu X, Jia T, Zhang X. et al. Clinical Pharmacists’ Involvement in Pharmacogenomics Testing and Related Services in China. J Pers Med 2022; 12: 1267 DOI: 10.3390/jpm12081267.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Huckle D. The impact of new trends in POCTs for companion diagnostics, non-invasive testing and molecular diagnostics. Expert Rev Mol Diagn 2015; 15: 815-827
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Chan CYW, Chua BY, Subramaniam M. et al. Clinicians’ perceptions of pharmacogenomics use in psychiatry. Pharmacogenomics 2017; 18: 531-538 DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2016-0164.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Vest BM, Wray LO, Brady LA. et al. Primary care and mental health providers’ perceptions of implementation of pharmacogenetics testing for depression prescribing. BMC psychiatry 2020; 20: 518 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-020-02919-z.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Van Driest SL, Shi Y, Bowton EA. et al. Clinically actionable genotypes among 10,000 patients with preemptive pharmacogenomic testing. Clin Pharm Ther 2014; 95: 423-431
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Bush WS, Crosslin DR, Owusu-Obeng A. et al. Genetic variation among 82 pharmacogenes: the PGRNseq data from the eMERGE network. Clin Pharm Ther 2016; 100: 160-169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Mostafa S, Kirkpatrick CMJ, Byron K. et al. An analysis of allele, genotype and phenotype frequencies, actionable pharmacogenomic (PGx) variants and phenoconversion in 5408 Australian patients genotyped for CYP2D6, CYP2C19, CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genes. J Neural Transm 2019; 126: 5-18
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar