Article

Primary care physicians' willingness to offer a new genetic test to tailor smoking treatment, according to test characteristics.

Harvard/MGH Center on Genomics, Vulnerable Populations and Health Disparities, Institute for Health Policy, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
Nicotine & Tobacco Research (Impact Factor: 2.81). 06/2008; 10(6):1037-45. DOI: 10.1080/14622200802087580
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Emerging pharmacogenetics research may improve clinical outcomes for common complex conditions typically treated in primary care settings. Physicians' willingness to offer genetically-tailored treatments to their patients will be critical to realizing this potential. According to recent research, it is likely that genotypes used to tailor smoking will have pleiotropic associations with other addictions and diseases, and may have different frequencies across populations. These additional features may pose an additional barrier to adoption. To assess physicians' willingness to offer a new test to individually tailor smoking treatment according to specific test characteristics, we conducted a national mailed survey of 2,000 U.S. primary care physicians (response rate: 62.3%). Physicians responded to a baseline scenario describing a new test to tailor smoking treatment, and three additional scenarios describing specific test characteristics based on published research; there was random assignment to one of two survey conditions in which the test was described as a genetic or non-genetic test. Our findings indicate physicians' self-reported likelihood (0-100 scale) that they would offer a new test to tailor smoking cessation treatment ranged from 69%-78% across all scenarios. Relative to baseline scenario responses, physicians were significantly less likely to offer the test when informed that the same genotypes assessed for treatment tailoring: (1) may also identify individuals predisposed to become addicted to nicotine (p<.001), (2) differ in frequency by race (p<.004), and (3) may have associations with other conditions (e.g., alcohol and cocaine addiction, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder ADHD and Tourette Syndrome) (p<.01). Describing a new test to individually tailor smoking treatment as a "genetic" versus non-genetic test significantly reduced physicians' likelihood of offering the test across all scenarios, regardless of specific test characteristics (p<.0007). Effective education of primary care physicians will be critical to successful integration of promising new pharmacogenetic treatment strategies for smoking.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Douglas E Levy, Jul 25, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
130 Views
  • Source
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite advances in characterizing genetic influences on addiction liability and treatment response, clinical applications of these efforts have been slow to evolve. Although challenges to clinical translation remain, stakeholders already face decisions about evidentiary thresholds for the uptake of pharmacogenetic tests in practice. There is optimism about potential pharmacogenetic applications for the treatment of alcohol use disorders, with particular interest in the OPRM1 A118G polymorphism as a moderator of naltrexone response. Findings from human and animal studies suggest preliminary evidence for the clinical validity of this association; on this basis, arguments for clinical implementation can be made in accordance with existing frameworks for the uptake of genomic applications. However, generating evidence-based guidelines requires evaluating the clinical utility of pharmacogenetic tests. This goal will remain challenging, largely due to minimal data to inform clinical utility estimates. The pace of genomic discovery highlights the need for clinical utility and implementation research to inform future translation efforts. Near-term implementation of promising pharmacogenetic tests can help expedite this goal, generating an evidence base to enable efficient translation as additional gene-drug associations are discovered.
    Addiction science & clinical practice 09/2014; 9(1):20. DOI:10.1186/1940-0640-9-20
  • Pharmacogenomics 04/2014; 15(6):723-726. DOI:10.2217/pgs.14.34 · 3.43 Impact Factor