STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy, speed, and cost of two methodologies used for genotyping known variants in the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9 metabolizing enzyme gene. DESIGN: Comparative study. SETTING: University research center. SAMPLES: Fifteen-milliliter mouthwash samples collected from 253 subjects participating in a warfarin pharmacogenomic study. INTERVENTION: Genotyping for the isoleucine-to-leucine change at codon 359 (Ile359Leu [*3] polymorphism) was performed by using the Pyrosequencing and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) methods in all 253 samples. Genotyping for the arginine-to-cysteine change at codon 144 (Arg144Cys [*2] polymorphism) was performed by using Pyrosequencing in all samples and by PCR-RFLP in a random subset of 136 samples. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Comparisons of genotyping success rates, time efficiency, and cost analyses were conducted for Pyrosequencing and PCR-RFLP at each variant site. Pyrosequencing and PCR-RFLP produced similar success rates on the first genotyping attempt for the Arg144Cys variant (93.3% vs 90.4%, respectively) and the Ile359Leu variant (83.8% vs 79.1%, respectively). With Pyrosequencing, genotyping 96 samples for either polymorphism could be performed in 1 hour. In contrast, genotyping 96 samples by RFLP took 10 hours for the Arg144Cys variant and 20 hours for the Ile359Leu variant. Total cost/sample for Arg144Cys genotyping was dollars 1.90 with PCR-Pyrosequencing and dollars 3.14 with PCR-RFLP. Total cost/sample for Ile359Leu genotyping was dollars 1.88 with PCR-Pyrosequencing and dollars 10.18 with PCR-RFLP CONCLUSION: Compared with RFLP, genotype determination by Pyrosequencing is a more time-efficient, cost-effective, and robust method for CYP2C9 genotyping. Because of its wide applicability and ease of use, Pyrosequencing is a promising technology for future pharmacogenomic investigations.
STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy, speed, and cost of two methodologies used for genotyping known variants in the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9 metabolizing enzyme gene. DESIGN: Comparative study. SETTING: University research center. SAMPLES: Fifteen-milliliter mouthwash samples collected from 253 subjects participating in a warfarin pharmacogenomic study. INTERVENTION: Genotyping for the isoleucine-to-leucine change at codon 359 (Ile359Leu [*3] polymorphism) was performed by using the Pyrosequencing and polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-restriction fragment length polymorphism (RFLP) methods in all 253 samples. Genotyping for the arginine-to-cysteine change at codon 144 (Arg144Cys [*2] polymorphism) was performed by using Pyrosequencing in all samples and by PCR-RFLP in a random subset of 136 samples. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Comparisons of genotyping success rates, time efficiency, and cost analyses were conducted for Pyrosequencing and PCR-RFLP at each variant site. Pyrosequencing and PCR-RFLP produced similar success rates on the first genotyping attempt for the Arg144Cys variant (93.3% vs 90.4%, respectively) and the Ile359Leu variant (83.8% vs 79.1%, respectively). With Pyrosequencing, genotyping 96 samples for either polymorphism could be performed in 1 hour. In contrast, genotyping 96 samples by RFLP took 10 hours for the Arg144Cys variant and 20 hours for the Ile359Leu variant. Total cost/sample for Arg144Cys genotyping was dollars 1.90 with PCR-Pyrosequencing and dollars 3.14 with PCR-RFLP. Total cost/sample for Ile359Leu genotyping was dollars 1.88 with PCR-Pyrosequencing and dollars 10.18 with PCR-RFLP CONCLUSION: Compared with RFLP, genotype determination by Pyrosequencing is a more time-efficient, cost-effective, and robust method for CYP2C9 genotyping. Because of its wide applicability and ease of use, Pyrosequencing is a promising technology for future pharmacogenomic investigations.
Authors: Mohamed Hossam A Shahin; Sherief I Khalifa; Yan Gong; Lamiaa N Hammad; Mohamed T H Sallam; Mostafa El Shafey; Shawky S Ali; Mohamed-Eslam F Mohamed; Taimour Langaee; Julie A Johnson Journal: Pharmacogenet Genomics Date: 2011-03 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Eric A Millican; Petra A Lenzini; Paul E Milligan; Leonard Grosso; Charles Eby; Elena Deych; Gloria Grice; John C Clohisy; Robert L Barrack; R Stephen J Burnett; Deepak Voora; Susan Gatchel; Amy Tiemeier; Brian F Gage Journal: Blood Date: 2007-03-26 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: N S Ferder; C S Eby; E Deych; J K Harris; P M Ridker; P E Milligan; S Z Goldhaber; C R King; T Giri; H L McLeod; R J Glynn; B F Gage Journal: J Thromb Haemost Date: 2009-10-30 Impact factor: 5.824
Authors: G Oner Ozgon; T Y Langaee; H Feng; N Buyru; T Ulutin; A C Hatemi; A Siva; S Saip; J A Johnson Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2008-06-10 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: B F Gage; C Eby; J A Johnson; E Deych; M J Rieder; P M Ridker; P E Milligan; G Grice; P Lenzini; A E Rettie; C L Aquilante; L Grosso; S Marsh; T Langaee; L E Farnett; D Voora; D L Veenstra; R J Glynn; A Barrett; H L McLeod Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2008-02-27 Impact factor: 6.875