MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402567628 · doi:10.1002/cpt.3404

Is Pharmacogenetic Testing a Vital Tool for Enhancing Therapeutic Management of Patients Worldwide?

2024· editorial· en· W4402567628 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathleen M. Giacomini, Piet H. van der Graaf

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics · 2024
Typeeditorial
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacogeneticsMedicineIntensive care medicinePharmacologyBiologyGenotypeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clinical pharmacology is a discipline that includes education, research, and the implementation of knowledge into clinical practice, which ranges from precision dosing to therapeutic drug monitoring, and most recently, to the implementation of pharmacogenetic/pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing services to precisely administer drugs based on an individual's genetic make-up.In fact, PGx has become one of the core scientific pillars of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics (ASCPT) and its flagship journal, Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (CPT).PGx implementation services have been rapidly adopted in academic healthcare centers throughout the United States and in Europe.These services are grounded in the availability of new genetic technologies and a wealth of scientific discoveries, generally describing the influence of genetic variants on drug responses in European ancestral populations.With the availability of PGx information, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) was established to develop guidelines on drug and dose selection for individuals based on their genetic information.1 These guidelines, published in CPT, 2,3 are increasingly being incorporated into clinical decision support systems, and used to advise providers on how to use PGx information in drug or dose selection.1 However, despite of their widespread adoption in academic medical centers, there remains a resistance to PGx testing among healthcare providers.This can be attributed to various factors, such as cost of testing, requirements for expensive infrastructure, lack of provider education, and skepticism that there is any major benefit of testing.4 With the goal of stimulating discussion among clinical pharmacologists and others, the editors of CPT sponsored a session at the 2024 annual meeting of ASCPT, entitled: "Is pharmacogenetic testing a vital tool for enhancing therapeutic management of patients worldwide?"(Colorado Springs CO, March 28, 2024).The session, which was moderated by CPT Editor-in-Chief, Piet van der Graaf, and Deputy Editor, Kathleen Giacomini, included four clinical pharmacologists or geneticists who brought different types of expertise to the panel

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.076
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.091

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.076
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.006

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.

Opus teacher head0.175
GPT teacher head0.509
Teacher spread0.334 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Pharmacology & TherapeuticsSame topicPharmacogenetics and Drug MetabolismFrench-language works237,207