Pharmacogenomics in the era of next generation sequencing – from byte to bedside
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pharmacogenetic research has resulted in the identification of a multitude of genetic variants that impact drug response or toxicity. These polymorphisms are mostly common and have been included as actionable information in the labels of numerous drugs. In addition to common variants, recent advances in Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) technologies have resulted in the identification of a plethora of rare and population-specific pharmacogenetic variations with unclear functional consequences that are not accessible by conventional forward genetics strategies. In this review, we discuss how comprehensive sequencing information can be translated into personalized pharmacogenomic advice in the age of NGS. Specifically, we provide an update of the functional impacts of rare pharmacogenetic variability and how this information can be leveraged to improve pharmacogenetic guidance. Furthermore, we critically discuss the current status of implementation of pharmacogenetic testing across drug development and layers of care. We identify major gaps and provide perspectives on how these can be minimized to optimize the utilization of NGS data for personalized clinical decision-support.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".