A Pilot Study for Return of Individual Pharmacogenomic Results to Population-Based Cohort Study Participants.

Kinuko Ohneda,Masahiro Hiratsuka,Hiroshi Kawame,Fuji Nagami,Yoichi Suzuki,Kichiya Suzuki,Akira Uruno,Mika Sakurai-Yageta,Yohei Hamanaka,Makiko Taira,Soichi Ogishima,Shinichi Kuriyama,Atsushi Hozawa,Hiroaki Tomita,Naoko Minegishi,Junichi Sugawara,Inaho Danjoh,Tomohiro Nakamura,Tomoko Kobayashi,Yumi Yamaguchi-Kabata,Shu Tadaka,Taku Obara,Eiji Hishimuma,Nariyasu Mano,Masaki Matsuura,Yuji Sato,Masateru Nakasone,Yohei Honkura,Jun Suzuki,Yukio Katori,Yoichi Kakuta,Atsushi Masamune,Yoko Aoki,Masaharu Nakayama,Shigeo Kure,Kengo Kinoshita,Nobuo Fuse,Masayuki Yamamoto

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31662/jmaj.2021-0156

2022-01-01

JMA Journal

Abstract:Introduction:Pharmacogenomic (PGx) testing results provide valuable information on drug selection and appropriate dosing, maximization of efficacy, and minimization of adverse effects. Although the number of large-scale, next-generation-sequencing-based PGx studies has recently increased, little is known about the risks and benefits of returning PGx results to ostensibly healthy individuals in research settings.Methods:Single-nucleotide variants of three actionable PGx genes, namely, MT-RNR1, CYP2C19, and NUDT15, were returned to 161 participants in a population-based Tohoku Medical Megabank project. Informed consent was obtained from the participants after a seminar on the outline of this study. The results were sent by mail alongside sealed information letter intended for clinicians. As an exception, genetic counseling was performed for the MT-RNR1 m.1555A > G variant carriers by a medical geneticist, and consultation with an otolaryngologist was encouraged. Questionnaire surveys (QSs) were conducted five times to evaluate the participants' understanding of the topic, psychological impact, and attitude toward the study.Results:Whereas the majority of participants were unfamiliar with the term PGx, and none had undergone PGx testing before the study, more than 80% of the participants felt that they could acquire basic PGx knowledge sufficient to understand their genomic results and were satisfied with their potential benefit and use in future prescriptions. On the other hand, some felt that the PGx concepts or terminology was difficult to fully understand and suggested that in-person return of the results was desirable.Conclusions:These results collectively suggest possible benefits of returning preemptive PGx information to ostensibly healthy cohort participants in a research setting.