40
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      STANDARDIZING TERMS FOR CLINICAL PHARMACOGENETIC TEST RESULTS: CONSENUS TERMS FROM THE CLINICAL PHARMACOGENETICS IMPLEMENTATION CONSORTIUM (CPIC)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          INTRODUCTION

          Reporting and sharing pharmacogenetic test results across clinical laboratories and electronic health records is a crucial step toward the implementation of clinical pharmacogenetics, but allele function and phenotype terms are not standardized. Our goal was to develop terms that can be broadly applied to characterize pharmacogenetic allele function and inferred phenotypes.

          MATERIALS AND METHODS

          Terms currently used by genetic testing laboratories and in the literature were identified. The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) used the Delphi method to obtain consensus and agree on uniform terms among pharmacogenetic experts.

          RESULTS

          Experts with diverse involvement in at least one area of pharmacogenetics (clinicians, researchers, genetic testing laboratorians, pharmacogenetics implementers, and clinical informaticians; n=58) participated. After completion of five surveys, consensus (>70%) was reached with 90% of experts agreeing to the final sets of pharmacogenetic terms.

          DISCUSSION

          The proposed standardized pharmacogenetic terms will improve the understanding and interpretation of pharmacogenetic tests and reduce confusion by maintaining consistent nomenclature. These standard terms can also facilitate pharmacogenetic data sharing across diverse electronic health care record systems with clinical decision support.

          Related collections

          Most cited references39

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Pharmacogenomics in the clinic.

            After decades of discovery, inherited variations have been identified in approximately 20 genes that affect about 80 medications and are actionable in the clinic. And some somatically acquired genetic variants direct the choice of 'targeted' anticancer drugs for individual patients. Current efforts that focus on the processes required to appropriately act on pharmacogenomic variability in the clinic are moving away from discovery and towards implementation of an evidenced-based strategy for improving the use of medications, thereby providing a cornerstone for precision medicine.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Consensus measurement in Delphi studies

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                9815831
                22061
                Genet Med
                Genet. Med.
                Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics
                1098-3600
                1530-0366
                19 June 2016
                21 July 2016
                23 January 2017
                : 10.1038/gim.2016.87
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN, USA
                [2 ]Center for Molecular Medicine, NorthShore University HealthSystem, Evanston, IL, USA
                [3 ]Department of Health Sciences Research, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
                [4 ]Departments of Medicine and Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
                [5 ]Department of Genetics, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
                [6 ]Department of Genetics and Genomic Sciences, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
                [7 ]Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; The Broad Institute of Harvard and MIT, Cambridge, MA, USA
                [8 ]Genomic Medicine Institute, Geisinger Health System, Danville, PA, USA
                Author notes
                Corresponding Author: Kelly E. Caudle, Pharm.D., Ph.D. BCPS, CPIC Coordinator, Pharmaceutical Sciences Department, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, 262 Danny Thomas Place MS: 313, Memphis, TN 38105, Office: 901-595-3994, Cell: 901-289-7392, Fax: 901-595-3125, Kelly.caudle@ 123456stjude.org
                Article
                NIHMS791384
                10.1038/gim.2016.87
                5253119
                27441996
                68cde36f-e050-47f2-b13c-ae7136b4e855

                Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: http://www.nature.com/authors/editorial_policies/license.html#terms

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Genetics
                pharmacogenetics,pharmacogenomics,informatics,cpic,nomenclature,loinc,logical observation identifiers names and codes,terminology,standard

                Comments

                Comment on this article