Literature DB >> 28187492

Are Evidence Standards Different for Genomic- vs. Clinical-Based Precision Medicine? A Quantitative Analysis of Individualized Warfarin Therapy.

D S Dhanda1, G F Guzauskas1, J J Carlson1, A Basu1, D L Veenstra1.   

Abstract

Evidence requirements for implementation of precision medicine (PM), whether informed by genomic or clinical data, are not well defined. Evidence requirements are driven by uncertainty and its attendant consequences; these aspects can be quantified by a novel technique in health economics: value of information analysis (VOI). We utilized VOI analysis to compare the evidence levels over time for warfarin dosing based on pharmacogenomic vs. amiodarone-warfarin drug-drug interaction information. The primary outcome was the expected value of perfect information (EVPI), which is an estimate of the upper limit of the societal value of conducting future research. Over the past decade, the EVPI for the pharmacogenomic strategy decreased from $1,550 to $140 vs. $1,220 to $280 per patient for the drug-interaction strategy. Evidence levels thus appear to be higher for pharmacogenomic-guided vs. drug-interaction-guided warfarin dosing. Clinical guidelines and reimbursement policies for warfarin PM could be informed by these findings.
© 2017 American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28187492      PMCID: PMC5552446          DOI: 10.1002/cpt.663

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther        ISSN: 0009-9236            Impact factor:   6.875


  41 in total

1.  Preference-Based EQ-5D index scores for chronic conditions in the United States.

Authors:  Patrick W Sullivan; Vahram Ghushchyan
Journal:  Med Decis Making       Date:  2006 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 2.583

2.  A rational framework for decision making by the National Institute For Clinical Excellence (NICE).

Authors:  Karl Claxton; Mark Sculpher; Michael Drummond
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-08-31       Impact factor: 79.321

3.  Evidence for Clinical Implementation of Pharmacogenomics in Cardiac Drugs.

Authors:  Amy L Kaufman; Jared Spitz; Michael Jacobs; Matthew Sorrentino; Shennin Yuen; Keith Danahey; Donald Saner; Teri E Klein; Russ B Altman; Mark J Ratain; Peter H O'Donnell
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2015-06       Impact factor: 7.616

4.  Model parameter estimation and uncertainty: a report of the ISPOR-SMDM Modeling Good Research Practices Task Force--6.

Authors:  Andrew H Briggs; Milton C Weinstein; Elisabeth A L Fenwick; Jonathan Karnon; Mark J Sculpher; A David Paltiel
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2012 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 5.725

5.  Major bleeding risk associated with warfarin and co-medications in the elderly population.

Authors:  Agnes I Vitry; Elizabeth E Roughead; Emmae N Ramsay; Adrian K Preiss; Philip Ryan; Andrew L Gilbert; Gillian E Caughey; Sepehr Shakib; Adrian Esterman; Ying Zhang; Robyn A McDermott
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2011-10       Impact factor: 2.890

6.  A pharmacogenetic versus a clinical algorithm for warfarin dosing.

Authors:  Stephen E Kimmel; Benjamin French; Scott E Kasner; Julie A Johnson; Jeffrey L Anderson; Brian F Gage; Yves D Rosenberg; Charles S Eby; Rosemary A Madigan; Robert B McBane; Sherif Z Abdel-Rahman; Scott M Stevens; Steven Yale; Emile R Mohler; Margaret C Fang; Vinay Shah; Richard B Horenstein; Nita A Limdi; James A S Muldowney; Jaspal Gujral; Patrice Delafontaine; Robert J Desnick; Thomas L Ortel; Henny H Billett; Robert C Pendleton; Nancy L Geller; Jonathan L Halperin; Samuel Z Goldhaber; Michael D Caldwell; Robert M Califf; Jonas H Ellenberg
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-11-19       Impact factor: 91.245

7.  A prospective, randomized pilot trial of model-based warfarin dose initiation using CYP2C9 genotype and clinical data.

Authors:  Michael A Hillman; Russell A Wilke; Steven H Yale; Humberto J Vidaillet; Michael D Caldwell; Ingrid Glurich; Richard L Berg; John Schmelzer; James K Burmester
Journal:  Clin Med Res       Date:  2005-08

8.  Clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics: overcoming genetic exceptionalism.

Authors:  Mary V Relling; Russ B Altman; Matthew P Goetz; William E Evans
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2010-04-21       Impact factor: 41.316

9.  Amiodarone, anticoagulation, and clinical events in patients with atrial fibrillation: insights from the ARISTOTLE trial.

Authors:  Greg Flaker; Renato D Lopes; Elaine Hylek; Daniel M Wojdyla; Laine Thomas; Sana M Al-Khatib; Renee M Sullivan; Stefan H Hohnloser; David Garcia; Michael Hanna; John Amerena; Veli-Pekka Harjola; Paul Dorian; Alvaro Avezum; Matyas Keltai; Lars Wallentin; Christopher B Granger
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2014-10-14       Impact factor: 24.094

10.  Methods for the estimation of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence cost-effectiveness threshold.

Authors:  Karl Claxton; Steve Martin; Marta Soares; Nigel Rice; Eldon Spackman; Sebastian Hinde; Nancy Devlin; Peter C Smith; Mark Sculpher
Journal:  Health Technol Assess       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.014

View more
  2 in total

1.  Are There Different Evidence Thresholds for Genomic Versus Clinical Precision Medicine? A Value of Information-Based Framework Applied to Antiplatelet Drug Therapy.

Authors:  Gregory F Guzauskas; Anirban Basu; Josh J Carlson; David L Veenstra
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 5.725

2.  Implementation of pharmacogenomic clinical decision support for health systems: a cost-utility analysis.

Authors:  Shangqing Jiang; Patrick C Mathias; Nathaniel Hendrix; Brian H Shirts; Peter Tarczy-Hornoch; David Veenstra; Daniel Malone; Beth Devine
Journal:  Pharmacogenomics J       Date:  2022-04-01       Impact factor: 3.245

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.