Search

BACKGROUND: Venlafaxine (V) is a serotonin-norepinephrine selective reuptake inhibitor, mainly metabolized by cytochrome P4502D6 (CYP2D6). CYP2D6 polymorphisms result in a variety of phenotypes: poor (PMs), intermediate (IMs), extensive (EMs), and ultrarapid metabolizers (UMs). PMs usually show poor tolerance to drugs metabolized by CYP2D6, while UMs need greater doses. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of CYP2D6 genotype on V dosage, therapeutic response, and side effects in a clinical outpatient setting. METHODS: 47 patients with Major Depressive Disorder, treated with V 75 - 300 mg/day, underwent CYP2D6 genotyping using the INFINITI-CYP2D6 assay. Duration of treatment and clinical outcome (Clinical Global Impression [CGI] effectiveness index) were assessed. RESULTS: CGI assessment was performed after 6 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year of treatment with a V median dose of 150 mg/day. CYP2D6 genotyping resulted in 1 PM, 3 IMs, 42 EMs, and 1 UM. The UM took the greatest V dose (375 mg) without side effects; IMs/PMs took moderate/high doses of V (150 - 300 mg) without adverse effects; EMs displayed high response variability. CONCLUSIONS: PM/IM patients responded to V differently than expected according to genotype. However, the UM patient responded to a dosage higher than the usual therapeutic range and without developing side effects, suggesting an association between CYP2D6 gene duplication and the therapeutic efficacy of venlafaxine. The CYP2D6 genotyping may thus provide clinicians with a potential explanation for those patients requiring greater doses of CYP2D6 substrates in order to obtain the same therapeutic efficacy.

BACKGROUND: The side effects of tamoxifen, a drug widely used for the treatment and the prevention of recurrence in patients with estrogen receptor positive breast cancers (ER+), have been reported in clinical trials, but to date no information is available on their possible association with an increased enzymatic activity of CYP2D6 (ultra-metabolizers, UMs). The aim of this study was therefore to evaluate the association between the presence of multiple functional CYP2D6 alleles and the occurrence of side effects. METHODS: 61 women with ER+ breast cancer receiving tamoxifen monotherapy were investigated in order to assess the relationships between CYP2D6 UM phenotype and side effects. Genotyping of 16 CYP2D6 polymorphisms was performed using a new DNA microarray technology. RESULTS: A highly significant difference was detected (41.2% of difference, 95% CI 6 - 61%, Fisher's exact test, p = 0.030) between the numbers of Ultrarapid Metabolizer patients (UM; high activity) with two or more adverse drug reactions to tamoxifen (7/9; 77.8%), compared to the number of Extensive Metabolizers (EM; normal activity), Intermediate Metabolizers (IM; reduced activity), and Poor Metabolizers (PM; no activity) with at least two side effects (19/52, 36.5%). A similar difference was also observed comparing the two groups (UM vs EM-IM-PM) for the number of side effects (median and inter quartile range, IQR: AM/EM/IM 1, IQR 0-2 vs. ULTRA 2, IQR 2-4; Mann-Whitney p = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a new association between CYP2D6 gene duplication and side effects to tamoxifen, indicating a possible role of CYP2D6 in their occurrence.

The activated protein C resistance--sensitivity ratio in the presence of Factor V deficient plasma (APC-SR/Factor V) exhibits a high sensitivity for factor V Leiden mutation and has been proposed as the diagnostic approach of choice, as an alternative to genetic tests, to evaluate activated protein C resistance. A survey, including 4969 requests, was performed on the activity of a typical Molecular Diagnostics Laboratory in order to estimate the costs due to reagents, instrumentation and personnel.The global costs of three hypothetical diagnostic approaches were compared: (A) exclusive molecular test for FV Leiden; (B) APC-SR alone; (C) APC-SR and the exclusive confirmation of positive results with molecular test.The global cost for each patient with the three approaches investigated were respectively 42.20 euros (A), 1.09 euros (B), and 433 euros (C). The cost for finding a patient with factor V Leiden mutation was 549.00 euros for A, 14.18 euros for B, and 56.32 euros for C. It was calculated that a decrease of 97.42% and 89.74% can be obtained using the approaches B and C, respectively. The difference in cost between B and C can be justified by the avoidance of false positive cases (6%) and by the impossibility of distinguishing homozygous from heterozygous patients using APC-SR exclusively (B).In the case of suspected phenotype APC resistance, we suggest a laboratory approach, which provides the combined and sequential use of ProCGlobal/FV analysis and a subsequent genetic test for positive patients.

BACKGROUND The identification of prothrombin G20210A polymorphism (PT20210) is normally included in the thrombophilia laboratory panel and evaluated by DNA-based molecular analysis. To date, a routine coagulation test that helps to identify PT20210 carriers has not been set, in contrast to the FV Leiden mutation, for which a functional coagulation test, the Activated Protein C Resistance test (APCR), is available as a screening tool. More- over the molecular tests are expensive and are used inappropriately. The aim of the study is to characterize the effects of the prothrombin G20210A mutation on routine clotting assays in order to identify, if any, coagulation tests that can be used as a first-line cost-effective assay for prothrombin G20210A polymorphism. METHODS Our cohort consisted of 80 PT20210 polymorphism carriers and 82 age and gender matched controls. All subjects were investigated for PT-INR, aPTT, dRVVT, FII (%), and Endogenous Thrombin Potential (EPT) parameters. RESULTS In heterozygotes and wild-type, PT, aPTT, and dRVVT values were not significantly different. The plasma activity of Factor II (%), AUC TG (%), and C max (%) of EPT were significantly higher in heterozygotes than in controls (p < 0.0001, Mann-Whitney test). In the absence of oral anticoagulant therapy and/or heparin, lupus anticoagulants, and liver disease, the discriminating abilities of the FII, AUC TG, and C max (%) to separate properly the study population into carriers and controls were equal to 0.99 (95% CI 0.98 to 1.00); 0.97 (95% CI 0.94 to 0.99), and 0.84 (95% CI 0.77 to 0.90), respectively. CONCLUSIONS All routine clotting assays performed in the present work are not useful as a screening tool for the G20210A prothrombin gene allele in a general population. Definitely, to date, the exclusive possible approach to identify the PT20210 mutation is molecular genetic testing, but unfortunately it is used inappropriately, contributing significantly to an uncontrolled waste of resources. It is mandatory to restrict the genetic thrombophilia test ordering to when it is actually recommended by the guidelines and to educate clinicians on the waste and danger of over-testing, particularly genetic tests, taking into account the fact that the PT20210 polymorphism is extremely variable (0.7 to 8% in Europe; 1.3-5% in the USA).