MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413802936 · doi:10.1017/cts.2026.10592

448 A systematic review of real-world evidence on the clinical relevance, characterization, and utility of CYP2D6 biomarker testing

2025· review· en· W4413802936 on OpenAlex
P. Alcaraz Rodríguez, Emma Kikerkov, Nora Emmott, Christine Y. Lu, Rachele Hendricks‐Sturrup

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical and Translational Science · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacogenetics and Drug Metabolism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacogenomicsCYP2D6BiomarkerPharmacogeneticsMedicinePrecision medicineRelevance (law)Personalized medicineDrug responseDrugBioinformaticsPharmacologyInternal medicineBiologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives/Goals: Limited systematic analysis of real-world evidence (RWE) on pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing utility, which can help provider decision-making and avoid serious adverse effects, exists. This study explores clinical-behavioral outcomes and implementation considerations, for PGx testing in real-world clinical settings for PGx biomarker CYP2D6. Methods/Study Population: Our systematic review investigated drug–gene pairs with strong evidence (Level A, Final classification by the Clinical Pharmacogenomics Implementation Consortium [CPIC]) for CYP2D6. Search strings were deployed across Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Semantic Scholar. Papers were included only if they presented, measured, and/or described real-world clinical or patient and/or provider behavioral outcomes based on EHR or claims data assessment following PGx testing for the CYP2D6 biomarker, included PGx biomarker(s)–drug pairs with CPIC Level A, Final Evidence designations, and published in English. Study quality and bias risks were assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale or A comprehenSive tool to Support rEporting and critical appraiSal…of reSearch outcomes (ASSESS) tools, where applicable. Results/Anticipated Results: Of the 218 articles identified, 25 met our inclusion criteria and explored 9 CPIC Level A, Final CYP2D6–drug pairs. Overarching qualitative themes were 1) variation in CYP2D6 biomarker testing and interpretation and 2) PGx test implementation and data considerations. CYP2D6–drug pairs were reported across four therapeutic areas (analgesia [n = 21], psychiatry [n = 17], oncology [n = 7], and gastroenterology [n = 6]) with the two most researched drugs being codeine (n = 21) and tramadol (n = 18). Six (6) articles reported PGx clinical outcomes, considered to be a “measurable change in symptoms, overall health, ability to function, quality of life, or survival outcomes” in relation to PGx testing. Discussion/Significance of Impact: Our findings indicate a need to address both inconsistent phenotype categorization and racial, ethnic, and genetic ancestry classifications and to improve EHR interoperability with PGx test results. Future RWE-PGx studies should associate dosage and regimen changes to both discrete provider choices and patient clinical-behavioral outcomes.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesMetaresearch
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.609
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.554
GPT teacher head0.608
Teacher spread0.054 · 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