David W Oslin1,2, Kevin G Lynch1,2, Mei-Chiung Shih3,4, Erin P Ingram1, Laura O Wray5,6,7, Sara R Chapman8, Henry R Kranzler1,2, Joel Gelernter9,10, Jeffrey M Pyne11,12, Annjanette Stone11, Scott L DuVall13,14,15, Lisa Soleymani Lehmann16,17,18, Michael E Thase1,2, Muhammad Aslam19,20, Steven L Batki21,22, James M Bjork23,24, Frederic C Blow25,26, Lisa A Brenner27,28, Peijun Chen29,30,31, Shivan Desai23, Eric W Dieperink32,33, Scott C Fears34,35, Matthew A Fuller31,36, Courtney S Goodman37, David P Graham38,39, Gretchen L Haas8,40, Mark B Hamner41,42, Amy W Helstrom1,2, Robin A Hurley37,43, Michael S Icardi44,45, George J Jurjus29,31, Amy M Kilbourne46,47, Julie Kreyenbuhl48,49, Daniel J Lache50,51, Steven P Lieske21, Julie A Lynch14,52, Laurence J Meyer14,53, Cristina Montalvo16,54, Sumitra Muralidhar46,55, Michael J Ostacher56,57, Gayla Y Paschall11, Paul N Pfeiffer25,26, Susana Prieto58, Ronald M Przygodzki46, Mohini Ranganathan9,59, Mercedes M Rodriguez-Suarez58, Hannah Roggenkamp34,60, Steven A Schichman11,61, John S Schneeweis62, Joseph A Simonetti27,63,64, Stuart R Steinhauer8,40, Trisha Suppes56,57, Maria A Umbert58, Jason L Vassy16,65, Deepak Voora66,67, Ilse R Wiechers6,68, Amanda E Wood69,70. 1. Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 2. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 3. VA Cooperative Studies Coordinating Center, Palo Alto, California. 4. Department of Biomedical Data Science, Stanford University, Palo Alto, California. 5. VA Center for Integrated Healthcare, Buffalo, New York. 6. VA Office of Mental Health and Suicide Prevention, Washington, DC. 7. Division of Geriatrics and Palliative Care, Jacobs School of Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, University at Buffalo, Buffalo, New York. 8. VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 9. VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven. 10. Departments of Psychiatry, Genetics, and Neuroscience, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 11. Central Arkansas Veterans Healthcare System, Little Rock. 12. Psychiatric Research Institute, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock. 13. VA Informatics and Computing Infrastructure, Salt Lake City, Utah. 14. VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, Utah. 15. Department of Internal Medicine Division of Epidemiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City. 16. VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts. 17. Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 18. Google, Mountain View, California. 19. Cincinnati VA Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. 20. University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio. 21. San Francisco VA Health Care System, San Francisco, California. 22. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, UCSF Weill Institute for Neurosciences, San Francisco, California. 23. Hunter Holmes McGuire VA Medical Center, Richmond, Virginia. 24. Department of Psychiatry, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond. 25. VA Center for Clinical Management Research, Ann Arbor, Michigan. 26. Department of Psychiatry, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 27. VA Rocky Mountain Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Rocky Mountain Regional VA Medical Center, Aurora, Colorado. 28. Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Psychiatry, and Neurology, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora. 29. Louis Stokes VA Medical Center, Cleveland, Ohio. 30. VISN 10 Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Cleveland, Ohio. 31. Department of Psychiatry, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, Ohio. 32. Minneapolis VA Health Care System, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 33. Department of Psychiatry, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis. 34. VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Los Angeles, California. 35. Semel Institute for Neuroscience and Human Behavior, University of California, Los Angeles. 36. Veterans Health Administration Pharmacy Benefits Management Services, Washington, DC. 37. W.G. (Bill) Hefner VA Medical Center, Salisbury, North Carolina. 38. Michael E. DeBakey VA Medical Center, Houston, Texas. 39. Menninger Department of Psychiatry, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas. 40. Department of Psychiatry, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 41. Ralph H. Johnson VA Medical Center, Charleston, South Carolina. 42. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston. 43. Departments of Psychiatry and Radiology, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 44. Iowa City VA Health Care System, Iowa City, Iowa. 45. Department of Pathology, University of Iowa, Iowa City. 46. VA Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC. 47. Department of Learning Health Sciences, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor. 48. VA Capitol Healthcare Network (VISN 5) Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Baltimore, Maryland. 49. Division of Psychiatric Services Research, Department of Psychiatry, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore. 50. Wilmington VA Medical Center, Wilmington, Delaware. 51. Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 52. Department of Epidemiology, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City. 53. Departments of Dermatology and Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City. 54. Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts. 55. VA Central Office, Washington, DC. 56. VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. 57. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, California. 58. Bruce W. Carter VA Medical Center, Miami, Florida. 59. Department of Psychiatry, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut. 60. Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles. 61. Department of Pathology, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock. 62. US Army Veteran. 63. Seattle-Denver Center of Innovation for Veteran-Centered and Value-Driven Care, Seattle, Washington, and Denver, Colorado. 64. Division of Hospital Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora. 65. Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 66. Durham VA Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina. 67. Center for Applied Genomics & Precision Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. 68. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of California, San Francisco. 69. VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Tacoma, Washington. 70. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle.
Abstract
Importance: Selecting effective antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) is an imprecise practice, with remission rates of about 30% at the initial treatment. Objective: To determine whether pharmacogenomic testing affects antidepressant medication selection and whether such testing leads to better clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that compared treatment guided by pharmacogenomic testing vs usual care. Participants included 676 clinicians and 1944 patients. Participants were enrolled from 22 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers from July 2017 through February 2021, with follow-up ending November 2021. Eligible patients were those with MDD who were initiating or switching treatment with a single antidepressant. Exclusion criteria included an active substance use disorder, mania, psychosis, or concurrent treatment with a specified list of medications. Interventions: Results from a commercial pharmacogenomic test were given to clinicians in the pharmacogenomic-guided group (n = 966). The comparison group received usual care and access to pharmacogenomic results after 24 weeks (n = 978). Main Outcomes and Measures: The co-primary outcomes were the proportion of prescriptions with a predicted drug-gene interaction written in the 30 days after randomization and remission of depressive symptoms as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) (remission was defined as PHQ-9 ≤ 5). Remission was analyzed as a repeated measure across 24 weeks by blinded raters. Results: Among 1944 patients who were randomized (mean age, 48 years; 491 women [25%]), 1541 (79%) completed the 24-week assessment. The estimated risks for receiving an antidepressant with none, moderate, and substantial drug-gene interactions for the pharmacogenomic-guided group were 59.3%, 30.0%, and 10.7% compared with 25.7%, 54.6%, and 19.7% in the usual care group. The pharmacogenomic-guided group was more likely to receive a medication with a lower potential drug-gene interaction for no drug-gene vs moderate/substantial interaction (odds ratio [OR], 4.32 [95% CI, 3.47 to 5.39]; P < .001) and no/moderate vs substantial interaction (OR, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.52 to 2.84]; P = .005) (P < .001 for overall comparison). Remission rates over 24 weeks were higher among patients whose care was guided by pharmacogenomic testing than those in usual care (OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.57]; P = .02; risk difference, 2.8% [95% CI, 0.6% to 5.1%]) but were not significantly higher at week 24 when 130 patients in the pharmacogenomic-guided group and 126 patients in the usual care group were in remission (estimated risk difference, 1.5% [95% CI, -2.4% to 5.3%]; P = .45). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with MDD, provision of pharmacogenomic testing for drug-gene interactions reduced prescription of medications with predicted drug-gene interactions compared with usual care. Provision of test results had small nonpersistent effects on symptom remission. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03170362.
Importance: Selecting effective antidepressants for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) is an imprecise practice, with remission rates of about 30% at the initial treatment. Objective: To determine whether pharmacogenomic testing affects antidepressant medication selection and whether such testing leads to better clinical outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A pragmatic, randomized clinical trial that compared treatment guided by pharmacogenomic testing vs usual care. Participants included 676 clinicians and 1944 patients. Participants were enrolled from 22 Department of Veterans Affairs medical centers from July 2017 through February 2021, with follow-up ending November 2021. Eligible patients were those with MDD who were initiating or switching treatment with a single antidepressant. Exclusion criteria included an active substance use disorder, mania, psychosis, or concurrent treatment with a specified list of medications. Interventions: Results from a commercial pharmacogenomic test were given to clinicians in the pharmacogenomic-guided group (n = 966). The comparison group received usual care and access to pharmacogenomic results after 24 weeks (n = 978). Main Outcomes and Measures: The co-primary outcomes were the proportion of prescriptions with a predicted drug-gene interaction written in the 30 days after randomization and remission of depressive symptoms as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) (remission was defined as PHQ-9 ≤ 5). Remission was analyzed as a repeated measure across 24 weeks by blinded raters. Results: Among 1944 patients who were randomized (mean age, 48 years; 491 women [25%]), 1541 (79%) completed the 24-week assessment. The estimated risks for receiving an antidepressant with none, moderate, and substantial drug-gene interactions for the pharmacogenomic-guided group were 59.3%, 30.0%, and 10.7% compared with 25.7%, 54.6%, and 19.7% in the usual care group. The pharmacogenomic-guided group was more likely to receive a medication with a lower potential drug-gene interaction for no drug-gene vs moderate/substantial interaction (odds ratio [OR], 4.32 [95% CI, 3.47 to 5.39]; P < .001) and no/moderate vs substantial interaction (OR, 2.08 [95% CI, 1.52 to 2.84]; P = .005) (P < .001 for overall comparison). Remission rates over 24 weeks were higher among patients whose care was guided by pharmacogenomic testing than those in usual care (OR, 1.28 [95% CI, 1.05 to 1.57]; P = .02; risk difference, 2.8% [95% CI, 0.6% to 5.1%]) but were not significantly higher at week 24 when 130 patients in the pharmacogenomic-guided group and 126 patients in the usual care group were in remission (estimated risk difference, 1.5% [95% CI, -2.4% to 5.3%]; P = .45). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with MDD, provision of pharmacogenomic testing for drug-gene interactions reduced prescription of medications with predicted drug-gene interactions compared with usual care. Provision of test results had small nonpersistent effects on symptom remission. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03170362.
Authors: Michelle J Bovin; Brian P Marx; Frank W Weathers; Matthew W Gallagher; Paola Rodriguez; Paula P Schnurr; Terence M Keane Journal: Psychol Assess Date: 2015-12-14
Authors: Anthony J Rothschild; Sagar V Parikh; Daniel Hain; Rebecca Law; Michael E Thase; Boadie W Dunlop; Charles DeBattista; Charles R Conway; Brent P Forester; Richard C Shelton; Matthew Macaluso; Krystal Brown; David Lewis; Alexander Gutin; Michael R Jablonski; John F Greden Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2020-12-15 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: Alfredo J Selim; William Rogers; John A Fleishman; Shirley X Qian; Benjamin G Fincke; James A Rothendler; Lewis E Kazis Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2008-12-03 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: David W Oslin; Sara Chapman; Scott L Duvall; Joel Gelernter; Erin P Ingram; Henry R Kranzler; Lisa Soleymani Lehmann; Julie A Lynch; Kevin G Lynch; Jeff M Pyne; Mei-Chiung Shih; Annjanette Stone; Michael E Thase; Laura O Wray Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2020-12-11 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Bernd Löwe; Oliver Decker; Stefanie Müller; Elmar Brähler; Dieter Schellberg; Wolfgang Herzog; Philipp Yorck Herzberg Journal: Med Care Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: A John Rush; Stephen R Wisniewski; Diane Warden; James F Luther; Lori L Davis; Maurizio Fava; Andrew A Nierenberg; Madhukar H Trivedi Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2008-08
Authors: Maria Laura Idda; Magdalena Zoledziewska; Silvana Anna Maria Urru; Gregory McInnes; Alice Bilotta; Viola Nuvoli; Valeria Lodde; Sandro Orrù; David Schlessinger; Francesco Cucca; Matteo Floris Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-09-02 Impact factor: 6.208