Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Meta-analysis of pharmacogenetic clinical decision support systems for the treatment of major depressive disorder

The Pharmacogenomics Journal volume 23, pages 45–49 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

The study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of studies comparing pharmacogenetically guided dosing of antidepressants with empiric standard of care. Publications referring to genotype-guided antidepressant therapy were identified via PubMed, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases from the inception of the databases to 2021. In addition, bibliographies of all articles were manually searched for additional references not identified in primary searches. Studies comparing clinical outcomes between two groups of patients who received antidepressant treatment were included in meta-analysis. Analysis of the data revealed statistically significant differences between the experimental group receiving pharmacogenetically guided dosing and the empirically treated controls. Specifically, genotype-guided treatment significantly improved response and remission of patients after both eight and twelve weeks of therapy, whereas no effect on the development of adverse drug reactions was observed. This meta-analysis indicates that the use of preemptive genotyping to guide dosing of antidepressants might increase treatment efficacy.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Forest plot of meta-analyses of studies on therapy response data at week 8 of treatment.
Fig. 2: Forest plot of meta-analyses of studies on remission onset at week 8 of treatment.
Fig. 3: Forest plot of meta-analyses of studies on therapy response at week 12 of treatment.
Fig. 4: Forest plot of meta-analyses of studies on remission onset at week 12 of treatment.
Fig. 5: Forest plot of meta-analyses of studies on adverse drug reactions development at week 12 of treatment.

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the preparation of the current meta-analysis, are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

  1. Vilches S, Tuson M, Vieta E, Álvarez E, Espadaler J. Effectiveness of a pharmacogenetic tool at improving treatment efficacy in major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of three clinical studies. Pharmaceutics. 2019;11:453. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics11090453.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. van Schaik RHN, Müller DJ, Serretti A, Ingelman-Sundberg M. Pharmacogenetics in psychiatry: an update on clinical usability. Front Pharm. 2020;11:575540. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2020.575540.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Brown L, Vranjkovic O, Li J, Yu K, Al Habbab T, Johnson H, et al. The clinical utility of combinatorial pharmacogenomic testing for patients with depression: a meta-analysis. Pharmacogenomics. 2020;21:559–69. https://doi.org/10.2217/pgs-2019-0157.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Karamperis K, Koromina M, Papantoniou P, Skokou M, Kanellakis F, Mitropoulos K, et al. Economic evaluation in psychiatric pharmacogenomics: a systematic review. Pharmacogenomics J. 2021;21:533–41. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41397-021-00249-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Solomon HV, Cates KW, Li KJ. Does obtaining CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 pharmacogenetic testing predict antidepressant response or adverse drug reactions? Psychiatry Res. 2019;271:604–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2018.12.053.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sutton RT, Pincock D, Baumgart DC, Sadowski DC, Fedorak RN, Kroeker KI. An overview of clinical decision support systems: benefits, risks, and strategies for success. NPJ Digit Med 2020;3:17. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41746-020-0221-y.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Malsagova KA, Butkova TV, Kopylov AT, Izotov AA, Potoldykova NV, Enikeev DV, et al. Pharmacogenetic testing: A tool for personalized drug therapy optimization. Pharmaceutics. 2020;12:1240. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics12121240.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Khairat S, Marc D, Crosby W, Al Sanousi A. Reasons for physicians not adopting clinical decision support systems: Critical analysis. JMIR Med Inf. 2018;6:e24. https://doi.org/10.2196/medinform.8912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bousman CA, Hopwood M. Commercial pharmacogenetic-based decision-support tools in psychiatry. Lancet Psychiatry. 2016;3:585–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(16)00017-1.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mueller D, Tiwari A, Zai C, Kennedy J. S222. Clinical utility of pharmacogenetic testing in schizophrenia treatment. Schizophr Bull 2018;44:S412. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby018.1009.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Kibitov A, Kiryanova E, Salnikova L, Zmeyeva E, Shmukler A, Kibitov A. The DRD2/ANKK1 Taq1A polymorphism in CYP2D6 extensive metabolizers is associated with the severity of extrapyramidal side effects of haloperidol treatment in schizophrenia spectrum disorders patients. Eur Psychiatry 2021;64:S122–S123. https://doi.org/10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.346.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Routhieaux M, Keels J, Tillery EE. The use of pharmacogenetic testing in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder: A systematic review. Ment Health Clin [Internet]. 2018;8:294–302. https://doi.org/10.9740/mhc.2018.11.294.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Liberati EG, Ruggiero F, Galuppo L, Gorli M, González-Lorenzo M, Maraldi M, et al. What hinders the uptake of computerized decision support systems in hospitals? A qualitative study and framework for implementation. Implement Sci. 2017;12:113. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13012-017-0644-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Roosan D, Hwang A, Law AV, Chok J, Roosan MR. The inclusion of health data standards in the implementation of pharmacogenomics systems: a scoping review. Pharmacogenomics. 2020;21:1191–202. https://doi.org/10.2217/pgs-2020-0066.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Relling MV, Klein TE, Gammal RS, Whirl-Carrillo M, Hoffman JM, Caudle KE. The clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium: 10 years later. Clin Pharm Ther. 2020;107:171–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1651.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Caudle KE, Klein TE, Hoffman JM, Muller DJ, Whirl-Carrillo M, Gong L, et al. Incorporation of pharmacogenomics into routine clinical practice: the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline development process. Curr Drug Metab. 2014;15:209–17. https://doi.org/10.2174/1389200215666140130124910.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Klein ME, Parvez MM, Shin JG. Clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics for personalized precision medicine: barriers and solutions. J Pharm Sci. 2017;106:2368–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xphs.2017.04.051.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lauschke VM, Milani L, Ingelman-Sundberg M. Pharmacogenomic biomarkers for improved drug therapy—recent progress and future developments. AAPS J. 2017;20:4. https://doi.org/10.1208/s12248-017-0161-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Russell LE, Zhou Y, Almousa AA, Sodhi JK, Nwabufo CK, Lauschke VM. Pharmacogenomics in the era of next generation sequencing - from byte to bedside. Drug Metab Rev. 2021;53:253–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/03602532.2021.1909613.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kroese M, Zimmern RL, Farndon P, Stewart F, Whittaker J. How can genetic tests be evaluated for clinical use? Experience of the UK Genetic Testing Network. Eur J Hum Genet. 2007;15:917–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.ejhg.5201867.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Keeling NJ, Rosenthal MM, West-Strum D, Patel AS, Haidar CE, Hoffman JM. Preemptive pharmacogenetic testing: exploring the knowledge and perspectives of US payers. Genet Med. 2019;21:1224–32. https://doi.org/10.1038/gim.2017.181.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Marrero RJ, Cicali EJ, Arwood MJ, Eddy E, DeRemer D, Ramnaraign BH, et al. How to transition from single-gene pharmacogenetic testing to preemptive panel-based testing: A tutorial. Clin Pharm Ther. 2020;108:557–65. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.1912.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hicks JK, Stowe D, Willner MA, Wai M, Daly T, Gordon SM, et al. Implementation of clinical pharmacogenomics within a large health system: from electronic health record decision support to consultation services. Pharmacotherapy. 2016;36:940–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/phar.1786.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. van der Wouden CH, Cambon-Thomsen A, Cecchin E, Cheung KC, Dávila-Fajardo CL, Deneer VH, et al. Implementing pharmacogenomics in Europe: design and implementation strategy of the ubiquitous pharmacogenomics consortium. Clin Pharm Ther. 2017;101:341–58. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Reisberg S, Krebs K, Lepamets M, Kals M, Mägi R, Metsalu K, et al. Translating genotype data of 44,000 biobank participants into clinical pharmacogenetic recommendations: challenges and solutions. Genet Med. 2019;21:1345–54. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41436-018-0337-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Backman JD, Li AH, Marcketta A, Sun D, Mbatchou J, Kessler MD, et al. Exome sequencing and analysis of 454,787 UK Biobank participants. Nature. 2021;599:628–34. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-04103-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Greden JF, Parikh SV, Rothschild AJ, Thase ME, Dunlop BW, DeBattista C, et al. Impact of pharmacogenomics on clinical outcomes in major depressive disorder in the GUIDED trial: a large, patient- and rater-blinded, randomized, controlled study. J Psychiatr Res. 2019;111:59–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2019.01.003.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bradley P, Shiekh M, Mehra V, Vrbicky K, Layle S, Olson MC, et al. Improved efficacy with targeted pharmacogenetic-guided treatment of patients with depression and anxiety: a randomized clinical trial demonstrating clinical utility. J Psychiatr Res. 2018;96:100–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2017.09.024.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Hall-Flavin DK, Winner JG, Allen JD, Carhart JM, Proctor B, Snyder KA, et al. Utility of integrated pharmacogenomic testing to support the treatment of major depressive disorder in a psychiatric outpatient setting. Pharmacogenet Genomics. 2013;23:535–48. https://doi.org/10.1097/FPC.0b013e3283649b9a.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Pérez V, Salavert A, Espadaler J, Tuson M, Saiz-Ruiz J, Sáez-Navarro C, 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. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1412-1.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Singh AB. Improved antidepressant remission in major depression via a pharmacokinetic pathway polygene pharmacogenetic report. Clin Psychopharmacol Neurosci. 2015;13:150–6. https://doi.org/10.9758/cpn.2015.13.2.150.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Bousman CA, Arandjelovic K, Mancuso SG, Eyre HA, Dunlop BW. Pharmacogenetic tests and depressive symptom remission: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Pharmacogenomics. 2019;20:37–47. https://doi.org/10.2217/pgs-2018-0142.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yoshida K, Müller DJ. Pharmacogenetics of antipsychotic drug treatment: Update and clinical implications. Mol Neuropsychiatry. 2020;5:1–26. https://doi.org/10.1159/000492332.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Moscow Research and Practical Centre on Addictions of the Moscow Department of Healthcare, 37/1 Lyublinskaya street, 109390, Moscow, Russian Federation

    Valentin Skryabin, Ilya Rozochkin, Mikhail Zastrozhin & Evgeny Bryun

  2. Russian Medical Academy of Continuous Professional Education of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation, 2/1 Barrikadnaya street, 123995, Moscow, Russian Federation

    Valentin Skryabin, Mikhail Zastrozhin, Evgeny Bryun & Dmitry Sychev

  3. University of California, San Francisco, 1701 Divisadero St, San Francisco, CA, 94115, USA

    Mikhail Zastrozhin

  4. Karolinska Institutet, Solnavägen 1, 171 77, Solna, Sweden

    Volker Lauschke

  5. Dr Margarete Fischer-Bosch Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Auerbachstraße 112, 70376, Stuttgart, Germany

    Volker Lauschke

  6. University of Tuebingen, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz, 72074, Tuebingen, Germany

    Volker Lauschke

  7. Karolinska Institutet, Centre for Psychiatry Research, Norra Stationsgatan 69, 113 64, Stockholm, Sweden

    Johan Franck

Authors
  1. Valentin Skryabin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ilya Rozochkin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mikhail Zastrozhin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Volker Lauschke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Johan Franck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Evgeny Bryun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Dmitry Sychev
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

VS: Conceptualization, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing—Original Draft, Writing-Review & Editing. IR: Conceptualization, Methodology, Validation, Investigation, Data Curation, Writing—Original Draft. MZ: Conceptualization, Formal Analysis, Writing—Original Draft, Visualization. VL: Conceptualization, Validation, Writing—Original Draft, Writing—Review & Editing. JF: Methodology, Writing—Original Draft, Supervision. EB: Writing—Review & Editing, Supervision. DS: Writing—Review & Editing, Supervision.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valentin Skryabin.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

VML is co is CEO and shareholder of HepaPredict AB, co-founder and shareholder of PersoMedix AB and discloses consultancy work for Enginzyme AB.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Skryabin, V., Rozochkin, I., Zastrozhin, M. et al. Meta-analysis of pharmacogenetic clinical decision support systems for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Pharmacogenomics J 23, 45–49 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41397-022-00295-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41397-022-00295-3

Search

Advanced search

Quick links