MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410951304 · doi:10.3390/children12060721

Moving Away from One-Size-Fits-All: Assessing the Use of Pharmacogenetic-Guided Medication Therapy in Pediatric Patients with Chronic Pain

2025· article· en· W4410951304 on OpenAlexafffund
Danielle Ruskin, Klaudia Szczech, Sierra Scodellaro, Naiyi Sun, Iris Cohn

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPharmaceutical studies and practices
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of TorontoWomen's College HospitalYork University
FundersHospital for Sick Children
KeywordsDosingMedicinePharmacogeneticsChronic painPharmacogenomicsCYP2D6MEDLINECYP2C19PharmacodynamicsDrugIntensive care medicinePharmacologyPsychiatryInternal medicinePharmacokineticsGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background/Objectives: Pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing can predict drug efficacy, toxicity, and risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs). However, PGx-guided prescribing for pediatric chronic pain is underutilized. Methods: We evaluated the rate of deviance from standard drug dosing regimens in children and adolescents with chronic pain based on PGx testing of drug-metabolizing genes. We also assessed the acceptability and feasibility of PGx testing and implementation of PGx-guided recommendations from patient, caregiver, and prescriber perspectives. Finally, we explored whether PGx results could predict self-reported therapeutic responses and/or ADRs to medications. Results: Forty-eight participants aged 8–17 years with chronic pain provided DNA via buccal swab. Genetic variant data for CYP2D6, CYP2C9, and CYP2C19 metabolism genes and associated metabolizer status were analyzed with respect to clinical PGx guidelines for dosing recommendations of analgesics and psychotropic medications. Participants, their caregivers, and their prescribers also completed quantitative questionnaires evaluating their experience with PGx testing. Twenty-three (50%) participants were predicted to benefit from non-standard dosing for medications with clinical PGx guidelines. Participants expressed satisfaction with the PGx testing process and felt it was safe and worthwhile. Prescribers also reported that PGx results were relevant for medication choices in 42 (91%) participants. Seven (15%) participants had genotyping results which may have predicted their self-reported therapeutic responses and/or ADRs to specific medications. Conclusions: Though further research on pharmacodynamic associations is required to sufficiently address the complexity of interpatient responses to medications for the treatment of pediatric pain and mental health conditions, PGx testing may be used to inform individualized medication choices based on genetic make-up.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildrenSame topicPharmaceutical studies and practicesFrench-language works237,207