Purpose:A number of institutions have clinically implemented CYP2D6 genotyping to guide drug prescribing. We compared implementation strategies of early adopters of CYP2D6 testing, barriers faced by both early adopters and institutions in the process of implementing CYP2D6 testing, and approaches taken to overcome these barriers.Methods:We surveyed eight early adopters of CYP2D6 genotyping and eight institutions in the process of adoption. Data were collected on testing approaches, return of results procedures, applications of genotype results, challenges faced, and lessons learned.Results:Among early adopters, CYP2D6 testing was most commonly ordered to assist with opioid and antidepressant prescribing. Key differences among programs included test ordering and genotyping approaches, result reporting, and clinical decision support. However, all sites tested for copy number variation and 9 common variants, and reported results in the medical record. Most sites provided automatic consultation and had designated personnel to assist with genotype-informed therapy recommendations. Primary challenges were related to stakeholder support, CYP2D6 gene complexity, phenotype assignment, and sustainability.Conclusion:There are specific challenges unique to CYP2D6 testing given the complexity of the gene and its relevance to multiple medications. Consensus lessons learned may guide those interested in pursuing similar clinical pharmacogenetic programs.

Compared with routine care, pharmacist-managed outpatient-based anticoagulation services attained better quality of anticoagulation control, lower bleeding and thromboembolic events, and resulted in lower health care utilization.

Precision pharmacotherapy encompasses the use of therapeutic drug monitoring, evaluation of liver and renal function, genomics, and environmental and lifestyle exposures; and analysis of other unique patient or disease characteristics to guide drug selection and dosing. This paper articulates real‐world clinical applications of precision pharmacotherapy, focusing exclusively on the emerging field of clinical pharmacogenomics. Precision pharmacotherapy is evolving rapidly, and clinical pharmacists now play an invaluable role in the clinical implementation, education, and research applications of pharmacogenomics. This paper provides an overview of the evolution of pharmacogenomics in clinical pharmacy practice, together with recommendations on how the American College of Clinical Pharmacy (ACCP) can support the advancement of clinical pharmacogenomics implementation, education, and research. Commonalities among successful clinical pharmacogenomic implementation and education programs are identified, with recommendations for how ACCP can leverage and advance these common themes. Opportunities are also provided to support the research needed to move the practice and application of pharmacogenomics forward.

Background Studies have demonstrated increased risk of major atherothrombotic events in CYP2C19 loss‐of‐function (LOF) variant carriers versus non‐carriers treated with clopidogrel after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). We sought to evaluate real‐world outcomes with the clinical implementation of CYP2C19 ‐guided antiplatelet therapy after PCI. Methods and Results Data from 9 medical centers where genotyping was performed in the setting of PCI were included. Alternative therapy with prasugrel or ticagrelor was recommended for patients with a CYP2C19 LOF variant. The primary outcome was the composite of major atherothrombotic events (all‐cause death, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, stent thrombosis, or hospitalization for unstable angina) within 12 months following PCI. Moderate or severe/life‐threatening bleeding within 12 months was a secondary outcome. Among 3342 patients, 1032 (31%) were LOF carriers, of whom 571/1032 (55%) were treated with alternative therapy. In LOF carriers, the rate of major atherothrombotic events was lower in patients treated with alternative therapy versus clopidogrel (adjusted HR, 0.56; 95% CI 0.39–0.82). In those without a LOF allele, no difference was observed (adjusted HR, 1.07; 95% CI 0.71–1.60). There was no difference in bleeding with alternative therapy versus clopidogrel in either LOF carriers or those without a LOF allele. Conclusions Real‐world data demonstrate lower atherothrombotic risk in CYP2C19 LOF carriers treated with alternative therapy versus clopidogrel and similar risk in those without a LOF allele treated with clopidogrel or alternative therapy. These data suggest that PCI patients treated with clopidogrel should undergo genotyping so that CYP2C19 LOF carriers can be identified and treated with alternative therapy.