Progress in Pharmacogenomics Implementation in the United States: Barrier Erosion and Remaining Challenges

Le résumé fourni par la source

Barriers to incorporating pharmacogenetics into routine clinical practice in the United States are well documented. Initial surveys by the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) in 2009 and 2010 identified barriers across four key domains that have hindered the widespread adoption of clinical pharmacogenetic testing. These are presented verbatim as: (i) absence of a definition of the processes required to interpret genotype information and to translate genetic information into clinical actions; (ii) need for recommended drug/gene pairs to implement clinically now; (iii) clinician resistance to consider pharmacogenetic information at the bedside; and (iv) concerns about test costs and reimbursement. Over time, many of these challenges have been overcome, and clinical pharmacogenetic testing has subsequently reached broader implementation. Despite this progress, several barriers remain that block further adoption. This narrative review used authors' expertise and experience to identify and describe current barriers to pharmacogenetic implementation across seven domains in the United States: equity and inclusion; guidelines and supporting evidence; regulatory agency oversight; payer coverage and insurance; availability of quality pharmacogenetic tests; electronic health records; and provider and patient education. Within each domain, it revisits past successes and challenges and explores remaining barriers. We also propose solutions to address ongoing challenges across these domains, including further expansion of recommendations beyond pharmacogenetic-specific guidelines, standards for designing clinical decision support tools, and broader pharmacogenetics education. Addressing these remaining obstacles directs work to enable broader adoption of clinical pharmacogenetic implementation to ultimately improve patient outcomes.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.